{
    "case_number": "CAC-ADREU-006526",
    "time_of_filling": null,
    "domain_names": [
        "mötesplatsen.eu"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "Lada Válková (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "Mötesplatsen i Norden AB (Mötesplatsen i Norden AB)"
    ],
    "complainant_representative": null,
    "respondent": [
        "Oksana Dasevskaja (UAB Novabrand)"
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "The Complainant is a Swedish firm, running a dating site called MÖTESPLATSEN.SE at <motesplatsen.se>. \r\n\r\nThe Complainant is the owner of the Swedish national trademark registration No 0411357 MÖTESPLATSEN, filed on September 22, 2009, and registered on June 4, 2010 in respect of services in Classes 38 and 45.\r\n\r\nThe Respondent registered the disputed domain name on October 11, 2012, however no specific information is provided about the Respondent’s business activities (apart from what is mentioned below under “Parties’ Contentions: Complainant).\r\n\r\nThe Complaint was received by the Czech Arbitration Court on July 3, 2013, and the Request for EURid Verification was sent the same day.\r\n\r\nAfter Notification of Deficiencies in Complaint was sent to the Complainant on July 9, 2013, the Complainant filed an amended Complaint on July 10, 2013.\r\n\r\nThe Czech Arbitration Court has verified that the Complaint satisfies the formal requirements of the ADR Rules and ADR Supplemental Rules of the Czech Arbitration Court. The payment in the required amount to the Czech Arbitration Court has been made by the Complainant. \r\n\r\nThe formal date of the Commencement of the ADR Proceeding was set to July 11, 2013. \r\n\r\nThe Respondent did not respond, and a Notification of Respondent’s Default was issued on September 11, 2013.\r\n\r\nOn September 17, 2013, Petter Rindforth was appointed as the panelist in this case. The Projected Decision Date was set to October 17, 2013.",
    "other_legal_proceedings": "The Panel is not aware of any other legal proceedings related to the disputed domain name.",
    "discussion_and_findings": "In order to succeed in a Complaint, the Complainant must show that the requirements of Article 21(1) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 874\/2004 have been complied with. This paragraph states that: \r\n\r\n“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 recognised or established by national and\/or Community law, such as the rights mentioned in Article 10(1), and where it: \r\n(a) has been registered by its holder without rights or legitimate interest in the name; or \r\n(b) has been registered or is being used in bad faith.” \r\n\r\nEstablished Rights\r\n\r\nArticle 10(1) lists as relevant prior rights, inter alia, registered national and Community trademarks.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant refers to the trademark MÖTESPLATSEN, registered and protected as a national trademark in Sweden, a member state of the European Union.\r\n\r\nThe Panel finds that the Complainant has successfully proved its rights to the trademark MÖTESPLATSEN.\r\n\r\nIdentical or confusingly similar\r\n\r\nHaving acknowledged that the Complainant has established prior rights to the trademark, the Panel has to decide whether the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to the Complainant’s name rights. \r\n\r\nIt is well-established that the TLD extension of a domain name, in this case “.eu”, does not affect the domain name for the purpose of determining whether it is identical or confusingly similar pursuant to Article 21 (1) of the Regulation (see Case No. 00283, lastminute.eu). \r\n\r\nAccordingly, <mötesplatsen> shall be compared to “MÖTESPLATSEN”. \r\n\r\nThe Panel finds that the disputed domain name is identical to the Complainant’s trademark. \r\n\r\nRights or legitimate interest \r\n \r\nThe Complainant contends that the Respondent has no permission to register the domain name, and has no rights to the trademark MÖTESPLATSEN.\r\n\r\nThe Respondent is using <mötesplatsen.eu> for a website offering dating services in competition to the Respondent’s service, as well as links to the Complainant’s web sites and advertisement of third party services that seems to be in direct competition with the Complainant. \r\n\r\nSuch use by the Respondent is not legitimate use and does not confer any rights in favour of the Respondent.\r\n\r\nIn lack of any Response from the Respondent, or any other information indicating the contrary, the Panel concludes that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of <mötesplatsen.eu>.\r\n\r\nRegistered or used in bad faith \r\n \r\nAlthough it is not necessary to establish whether the disputed domain name is registered or used in bad faith, the Panel wishes to comment briefly also on this requirement: \r\n\r\nThe Complainant is a Swedish company, with a Swedish national trademark registration for MÖTESPLATSEN, using the trademark for a web site for dating services. \r\n\r\nThe Respondent is based in Lithuania, but has registered the disputed domain name with the exact Swedish spelling of MÖTESPLATSEN and using it for a web site that is an obvious try to confuse the visitors that they have in fact reached the Complainant’s web site or at least that the Respondent is closely related to the Complainant.\r\n\r\nTherefore, the Panel concludes that <mötesplatsen.eu> was chosen with the Complainant in mind and that the domain name was both registered and used in bad faith.",
    "decision": "For all the foregoing reasons, in accordance with Paragraphs B12 (b) and (c) of the Rules, the Panel orders that the domain name MÖTESPLATSEN.eu be transferred to the Complainant.",
    "panelists": [
        null
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2013-09-23 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "I.      Disputed domain name: mötesplatsen.eu\r\n\r\nII.     Country of the Complainant: Sweden, country of the Respondent: Lithuania\r\n\r\nIII.    Date of registration of the domain name: 11 October, 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.   Figurative trademark, registered in Sweden, reg. No. 0411357, for the term MÖTESPLATSEN, filed on 22 September 2009, registered on 4 June 2010 in respect of services in classes 38 and 45\r\n\r\nV.    Response submitted: No\r\n\r\nVI.   Domain name is identical to the protected right 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: Respondent has no permission to use\/register the domain name identical to Complainant's trademark, and is only using it to compete with the Complainant\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: Should have known of the Complainant's trademark at time of registration and is using it for the same services with links to the Complainant and competitors.\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: No\r\n\r\nXII.  Is Complainant eligible? Yes",
    "decision_domains": [],
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}