{
    "case_number": "CAC-ADREU-006339",
    "time_of_filling": null,
    "domain_names": [
        "natwesttbnkplc.eu"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "Lada Válková (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "Ms Suzanne Wright (National Westminster Bank plc)"
    ],
    "complainant_representative": null,
    "respondent": [
        "Gladys Oliyns"
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "The Complainant is an internationally recognized bank, incorporated in London under company No. 929027. It resulted as a merger of National Provincial Bank (est. 1833) and Westminster Bank (est. 1836). The merger took place in 1968. Both banks trace their history back to 1650s. The Complainant is now part of the Royal Bank of Scotland Group. \r\n\r\nThe Complainant has 7.5 million personal customers and 850,000 small business accounts. It offers financial services under the brand name »NATWEST«. The Complainant has registered trademarks »NATWEST« in 47 countries of the world, including 15 EU countries. It also has several more registred trademarks containing the name »NATWEST«. \r\n\r\nThe Complainant operates websites www.natwest.com, www.natwest.co.uk, and others. \r\n\r\nThe Respondent registered the disputed domain name »natwesttbnkplc.eu« (hereinafter the »Domain Name«) on February 24, 2012. \r\n\r\nThe Respondent used to operate the website »www.natwesttbnkplc.eu«, using logo of the Complainant, and graphic image of the website of the Complainant. \r\n\r\nThe Complainant tried to settle the dispute in 2012 by sending two letters to the Respondent, demanding from him to transfer the Domain Name to the Complainant, and to refrain from using trademarks of the Complainant (letters from April 11, 2012, and April 18, 2012). \r\n\r\nThe Respondent did not reply to the letters of the Complainant.  \r\n\r\nIn this proceeding the Respondent has not filed any response. \r\n\r\nThere is no indication from the evidence that the Respondent has any right or legitimate interest to the Domain Name. \r\n\r\nAt the time of deciding this case, the website with the Domain Name is not active.",
    "other_legal_proceedings": "None of which this panel is aware of.",
    "discussion_and_findings": "Under Article 21 (1) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 874\/2004 (hereinfter: Commission Regulation) in order to succeed under this dispute resolution procedure a Complainant must show that the Domain Name is:\r\n(i) identical or confusingly similar to a name in respect of which a right is recognised or established by national and\/or Community law and: \r\n(ii) the Domain Name has been registered by its holder without rights or legitimate interest in the name; or \r\n(iii) has been registered or is being used in bad faith. \r\n\r\nThe rights mentioned in Article 10 (1) of the Commission Regulation shall be understood to include national and community trademarks and, as far as they are protected under national law in the Member State where they are held: trade names, business identifiers or company names. \r\n\r\nIdentical or confusingly similar name:\r\n\r\nThe Complainant is an owner of trademark »NATWEST« and trademarks deriving from »NATWEST« in 47 countries. The Domain Name does not completely correspond to the trademark. The Domain name contains the trademark of the Complainant and suffixes »bnk« and »plc«. »Bnk« and »plc« are generic terms. »bnk« is associated with banks and banking, and »plc« describes public limited companies. The suffixes »bnk« and »plc« therefore don't constitute any signicifant differentiating part of the Domain Name. \r\n\r\nThis Arbitration Court has found on several occasions that the use of complainant's trademark combined with generic terms does not distinguish the disputed domain name from the one of the complainant (for example ADR case 6221 »MICROSOFT-SERVERS«, »MICROSOFT-CLOUD-COMPUTING«; ADR case 6045 »PORSCHE-MAGAZIN«, »PORSCHEMAGAZIN«; ADR case 6071 »BARCLAYCORPORATEFUNDING«, ADR case 6063 »MICROSOFTSERVICE«; and ADR case 3292 »EGOOGLE«, »E-GOOGLE). \r\n\r\nThere is an aditional letter »t« in the middle of Domain Name, which is, as a letter, also »generic« and does not constitute any sign which would significantly differentiate the Domain Name from the the trademark of the Complainant. In the Domain Name is composed of 13 letters, and double letter »t« instead of a single »t« can also  be overlooked easily. Therefore the Panel is of the view that the Domain Name is confusingly similar to the trademark of the Complainant. \r\n\r\nNo rights or legitimate interest of the Respondent:\r\n\r\nSince the Respondent did not reply to the allegations of the Complainant, the Panel can only consider the evidence submitted by the Complainant. The evidence does not show any rights or legitimate interest of the Respondent regarding the Domain Name. The Respondent is not in banking business, doesn't own a public limited company, and has no right to the Domain Name.\r\n\r\nThese findings are satisfactory to decide the case in favour of the Complainant. \r\n\r\nBad faith:\r\n\r\nIn addition to the findings above, the Domain Name was used in bad faith. The Respondent did not only use the Domain Name, but also the registered trademark of the Complainant »NATWEST«. The Respondent's webpage imitated the webpage of the Complainant, despite the fact that Respondent does not operate in banking business. Therefore, it is obvious that the Respondent tried to mislead visitors of the webpage. \r\n\r\nThe Panel found that the Complainant, being a company from the United Kingdom is eligible to hold the Domain Name.\r\n\r\nTherefore requirements from Article 21 of the Commission Regulation are met to transfer the Domain Name to the Complainant.",
    "decision": "For all the foregoing reasons, in accordance with Paragraphs B12 (b) and (c) of the Rules, the Panel orders that the domain name NATWESTTBNKPLC.EU be transferred to the Complainant",
    "panelists": [
        null
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2013-04-28 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "I.      Disputed domain name: NATWESTTBNKPLC.EU\r\n\r\nII.     Country of the Complainant: United Kingdom; country of the Respondent: United Kingdom\r\n\r\nIII.    Date of registration of the domain name: 24 February 2012\r\n\r\nIV.    Rights relied on by the Complainant (Art. 21 (1) Regulation (EC) No 874\/2004) on which the Panel based its decision:\r\n        1.   word trademark NATWEST registered in United Kingdom, reg. No. 1021601, registered on 3 December 1973 in respect of goods and services in class 16\r\n        2.   word trademark NATWEST registered in France, reg. No. 1205214, registered on 28 May 1982 in respect of goods and services in class 35\r\n        3.   85 more trademarks including the word NATWEST registered in EU and other countries  \r\n       \r\nV.    Response submitted: No\r\n\r\nVI.   Domain name is confusingly similar to the protected rights of the Complainant\r\n\r\nVII.  Rights or legitimate interests of the Respondent (Art. 21 (2) Regulation (EC) No 874\/2004):\r\n        1. No\r\n        2. Why: Not even claimed\r\n\r\nVIII. Bad faith of the Respondent (Art. 21 (3) Regulation (EC) No 874\/2004):\r\n        1. Yes\r\n        2. Why: Creation of a false impression of a connection with the Complainant when none exists.\r\n\r\nIX.   Other substantial facts the Panel considers relevant: None. \r\n\r\nX.    Dispute Result: Transfer of the disputed domain name.\r\n\r\nXI.   Procedural factors the Panel considers relevant: None.\r\n\r\nXII.  Is Complainant eligible? Yes",
    "decision_domains": [],
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}