ADR.eu

Select language

This site serves for .eu disputes only.

Back to entry page - choose type of domain name dispute

Start a .eu ADR dispute by login / register

Logged on as Anonymous

Dispute

Complaint
- Complaint Suspended
Response
- - Next:
  - Acknowledgement of Receipt of the Response
  - Description:
  - Prepare Response
- Prepare Response
- - Next:
  - Review Amended Response
  - Challenge Respondent's Default
  - Description:
  - Amend Response
- Amend Response
- - Next:
  - Receipt of Challenge of Resp. Default
  - Selection of Panelists
  - Verify Payment
  - Description:
  - Challenge Respondent's Default
- Challenge Respondent's Default
Panelists
- - Next:
  - Challenge of Panelist by Complainant
  - Response to Panelist Challenge
  - Dispute Decision
  - Description:
  - Challenge of Panelist by Respondent
- Challenge of Panelist
- - Next:
  - Response to Panelist Challenge
  - Dispute Decision
  - Description:
  - Challenge of Panelist by Respondent
- Challenge of Panelist by Respondent
- - Next:
  - Decision on Panelist Challenge
  - Description:
  - Response to Panelist Challenge by Respondent
- Response to Panelist Challenge
Decision
- - Next:
  - Response to Additional Evidence
  - Description:
  - Prepare Additional Evidence
- Additional Evidence
- Complaint Accepted
- Complaint Rejected
Defective Complaint
- Dispute Terminated

Complainant:

MarkMonitor, David Haenel

Respondent:

EURid

Disputed Domain Name(s):

TAL.EU

ADR Center for .eu attached to the Arbitration Court attached to the Economic Chamber of the Czech Republic and Agricultural Chamber of the Czech Republic (Czech Arbitration Court)

Panel Decision

§ B12 of the .eu Dispute Resolution Rules (ADR Rules)

Case No.:	03946
Time of Filing:	2006-12-05 10:58:24
Administrative Contact:	Tomáš Paulík

Complainant
Name:	MarkMonitor, David Haenel

Complainant's Authorized Representative
Name:

Respondent
Name:	EURid

Respondent's Authorized Representative
Name:

Domain Name(s):	TAL

Other Legal Proceedings
The Panel is not aware of any other legal proceedings that are pending or decided and that relate to the disputed domain name

English summary of the decision:	English summary of this Decision is hereby attached as Annex 1

Factual Background
The domain name tal.eu was registered to Rui Manuel Costa Seixas, an individual, during the Second Phase of the Sunrise Period for .eu domains. According to the Registry, the prior right relied upon was a company name. In support the documentary evidence relied upon consisted of a copy of the statutes of incorporation of the company "TAL – Tecnica de ascensores, LDA", a company incorporated in Portugal. The Complainant is MarkMonitor, David Haenel. Whilst his interest in the domain name is not apparent, he seeks to have the registration annulled

Parties’ Contentions
Complainant The Complainant seeks only to have the registration annulled on the grounds that the Prior Right relied upon by the applicant does not match the tal.eu domain name requested by applicant. In fact, he observes, 'tal' is only part of the the complete name for which the Prior Right exists, in violation of the Sunrise rules and Article 10 of the EC Regulation 874/2004. Respondent The Respondent agrees that the registration should be annulled but for different reasons. In principle, it observes, the company name "TAL – Tecnica de ascensores, LDA" can support an application for the domain name "tal.eu" because the words “Tecnica de ascensores” are merely descriptive of the companies activities and TAL is without any doubt the distinctive part of the company name. However, it adds, the validation agent should have found that the Applicant did not demonstrate that he, Rui Manuel Costa Seixas, was the holder of a prior right on the name TAL. Based on these findings, the Respondent would have rejected the Applicant’s application.

Discussion and Findings
In this case, the Complainant seeks an annulment on certain grounds, whereas the Registry agrees to the annulment but for different reasons. Accordingly, whilst there might be a difference in emphasis in the interpretation of the facts, the facts themselves are not in dispute; nor is the the appropriateness of the remedy. The Panel finds that the Applicant does not have a prior right to the domain, which should not have been registered to him.

Decision
For all the foregoing reasons, in accordance with Paragraphs B12 (b) and (c) of the Rules, the Panel orders that the EURID's decision be annulled.

Panelists
Joseph Dalby
Date:	2007-02-02
Annex 1
Both Complainant and Registry sought annulment of the registration of the domain name albeit for different reasons. The Panel found that the applicant did not have a prior right to the domain name and allowed the request for annulment.

Print this Form