The NOTINO marks are well known throughout the EU and beyond. The Complainant operates a network of country-coded e-shops (<notino.cz>, <notino.sk>, <notino.pl>, <notino.it>, <notino.dk>, <notino.ro>, <notino.hr>, <notino.es> and others) that achieved turnover in excess of EUR 1 billion in the financial year 2022, making it the largest pure e-commerce beauty reseller in Europe. It is not plausible that the Respondent chose the strings \"notimstore-hr\", \"notinstorepl\" and \"notshopitaly\" without knowledge of NOTINO. <\/p>", "other_legal_proceedings": "
The Panel is not aware of any other legal proceedings which are pending or decided and which relate to the disputed domain name.<\/p>", "no_response_filed": "
The Complainant contends that the requirements of the Policy have been met and that the disputed domain name should be transferred to it.
No administratively compliant Response has been filed.<\/p>",
"rights": "
The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights (within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy).<\/p>", "no_rights_or_legitimate_interests": "
The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown the Respondent to have no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name (within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(ii) of the Policy).<\/p>", "bad_faith": "
The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown the disputed domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith (within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(iii) of the Policy).<\/p>", "procedural_factors": "
CONSOLIDATION OF THE PROCEEDINGS<\/p>\n
The Complainant has requested that the disputed domain names and the named Respondents be consolidated in a single UDRP proceeding.<\/p>\n
According to Paragraph 3(c) of the UDRP Rules, a complaint may relate to more than one domain name, provided that the domain names are registered by the same domain-name holder. In this case all three domain names are registered by the same proprietor. The deviation in the physical address of the third registration is more than compensated for by the identical first and last names, the near identical email addresses and the use of the identical registrar. The Panel has no doubt that the registrant in all three cases is the same person. Under these circumstances, consolidation is both permissible and reasonable.<\/p>\n
The Panel is therefore satisfied that all procedural requirements under UDRP were met and there is no other reason why it would be inappropriate to provide a decision.<\/p>\n<\/div>", "decision": "Accepted", "panelists": [ "Udo Pfleghar B.A. (Melb.)" ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2026-09-14 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "
The Complainant is the current registered proprietor of the following NOTINO-formative EU trademarks:<\/p>\n