{
    "case_number": "CAC-ADREU-006038",
    "time_of_filling": null,
    "domain_names": [
        "hellas-sat.eu"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "Tereza Bartošková (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "EVAGGELIA KATSIKEROU (HELLAS SAT SOCIETE ANONYME SATELLITE SYSTEMS AND COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES)"
    ],
    "complainant_representative": null,
    "respondent": [
        "KONSTANTINOS MARKETOS"
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "The domain name hellas-sat.eu is registered by the Respondent. The Respondent has demanded from the Complainant to buy said domain name. The Complainant is a legal entity, which belongs to the Hellenic Telecommunications Organization (OTE S.A.) Group of Companies. It is a subsidiary, by 99.9%, of the Cypriot limited liability company under the corporate name “HELLAS SAT CONSORTIUM LIMITED”, which is a subsidiary, by 99.05% of the Hellenic Telecommunications Organization (OTE S.A.). The Complainant is established and operates since 2001 under the corporate name “HELLAS SAT SOCIETE ANONYME SATELLITE SYSTEMS AND COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES”, using the distinctive title “HELLAS SAT”.",
    "other_legal_proceedings": "",
    "discussion_and_findings": "The Complainant has paid the procedural fee as well as the Single Panelist fee of the Czech Arbitration Court, as evidenced by the case file. \r\nThe Complainant is a legal entity registered in Athens Greece (see Annexes 1 and 2: Hellenic Government Official Gazette, Issues regarding the Establishment and Legal Representation of the Company, as well as Annexes 7 and 8: Official Translation of Annexes 1 and 2, all attached to the complaint), which satisfies the general eligibility criteria set by EC Regulation 733\/2002 article 4.2.b, and entitles the Complainant to ask for the transfer of said domain name to it in accordance with article 22 § 11 of Regulation 874\/2004. \r\nIn response to the Complainant’s application for the disclosure of personal data, EURID replied on the 25\/02\/2011 (Annex 14, attached to the complaint), disclosing the contact details of the Respondent. As evidenced by Non Standard Communication, dated from 30-09-2011, 11:27:52, the Case Administrator informed the interesting parties that “neither the written notice of the Complaint sent out on 17 August 2011 nor the advice of delivery thereof was returned to the Czech Arbitration Court. The CAC is therefore unaware if the written notice was received by the Respondent or not. In accordance with Art. 2 (e) (3) of the ADR Rules we consider the written notice to be delivered on 29 August 2011. Therefore the term for submitting the Response to Complaint will expire on 10 October 2011. According to our records the Respondent has never accessed the online platform”. The same information was delivered by the Case Administrator on the 17-10-2011, 08:45:20. Pursuant to Articles 22 § 10 Regulation 874\/2004 & B 10 (a) of the ADR Rules, the Panel may consider an absence of response as an acceptance of the Complaint. Although no response was filed, the Panel will nevertheless examine whether Regulation 874\/2004 applies to the case and prior to this whether the pieces of evidence brought by the Complainant are admissible.\r\n\r\nA. ON THE RIGHTS OF THE COMPLAINANT TO THE DOMAIN NAME\r\n\r\nThe Complainant’s fundament for seeking the transfer of the domain name hellas-sat.eu lies on its claimed right, according to Art. 10.1 in conjunction with Art. 21.1 Regulation 874\/2004. Article 21.1 Regulation 874\/2004 stipulates that  a registered domain name shall be subject to revocation, using an appropriate extra-judicial or judicial procedure, where that name is identical or confusingly similar to a name in respect of which a right is recognized or established by national and\/or Community law, such as the rights mentioned in article 10.1 of EC Regulation 874\/2004, and where it (a) has been registered by its holder without rights or legitimate interest in the name; or (b) has been registered or is being used in bad faith. The issue in need of verification is whether the Complainant actually has a right recognized or established by national and\/or Community law, falling within the ambit of Art. 10.1 Regulation 874\/2004. Art. 10.1 provides that (§1): Holders of prior rights recognized or established by national and\/or Community law and public bodies shall be eligible to apply to register domain names during a period of phased registration before general registration of. eu domain starts. “Prior rights” shall be understood to include, inter alia, registered national and community trademarks, geographical indications or designations of origin, and, in as far as they are protected under national law in the Member-State where they are held: unregistered trademarks, trade names, business identifiers, company names, family names, and distinctive titles of protected literary and artistic works... (§2): The registration on the basis of a prior right shall consist of the registration of the complete name for which the prior right exists, as written in the documentation which proves that such a right exists. \r\nThe Complainant is entitled to ask for the transfer of the domain name under dispute, because it fulfils the requirements according to Art. 10.1, in conjunction with Art. 10.2 Reg. 874\/2004. The complainant is the holder of prior rights. Registered national or Community trade marks, or trade names of legal entities, constitute prior rights pursuant to Art. 10.1 and 10.2 Reg. 874\/2004. Beyond any doubt, it is the duty of the complainant to describe exactly the type of rights claimed, and specify the law or the laws as well as the conditions under which the right is recognized and\/or established. The wording in Art. B 1 b (9) of ADR Rules is clear in this respect. The Complainant has met with those requirements, as evidenced by the complaint filed and the contentions included in the present decision. For all the above reasons, the Panel decides that the complainant is the holder of prior rights in respect of the domain name hellas-sat.eu.\r\n\r\nB. ON THE BAD FAITH OF THE RESPONDENT\r\n\r\nThe complainant invokes Art. 21.3 Reg. 874\/2004, in order to demonstrate the respondent’s bad faith. Bearing in mind the respondent’s reluctance to access the online platform, read the Complainant’s statement of facts, communicate any information to the CAC or its Case administrator, and state any response to the complaint, he clearly failed to show any demonstrable link between himself and the domain name he registered, thus leaving to the Panel no other way as to deem the above failures as full acceptance of the complainant’s argumentation in regard to his bad faith, pursuant to Art. 21.3, combined with Art. 22 § 10 Reg. 874\/2004 and Art. B 10 (a) ADR Rules.",
    "decision": "For all the foregoing reasons, in accordance with Paragraphs B12 (b) and (c) of the Rules, the Panel orders that\r\nthe domain name HELLAS-SAT be revoked\r\nthe domain name HELLAS-SAT be transferred to the Complainant",
    "panelists": [
        null
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2011-12-13 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "The Complainant is a Greek legal entity bearing the trade name HELLAS SAT SOCIETE ANONYME SATELLITE SYSTEMS AND  COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES, and using the distinctive sign \"hellas sat\". The domain name hellas-sat.eu is registered by the Respondent. The Respondent did not participate in the proceedings, nor did he contact the CAC in any means of communication available. Given the fact that the Complainant has demonstrated the existence of prior rights in the form of trade marks, distinctive signs and trade names, coupled with the absolute defiance of the present proceedings by the Respondent, the Panel decides in accordance to Art. 22 § 10 Reg. 874\/2004 and Art. B 10 (a) ADR Rules, to order the revocation and the transfer of the domain name in dispute to the Complainant.",
    "decision_domains": [],
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}