{
    "case_number": "CAC-ADREU-007149",
    "time_of_filling": null,
    "domain_names": [
        "aldidirect.eu"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "Lada Válková (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "LYNETTE REES (ALDI STORES LIMITED)"
    ],
    "complainant_representative": null,
    "respondent": [
        "Greg Saunderson"
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "The Respondent registered the domain ALDIDIRECT.eu on the 6 August 2015 with GODADDY of Scottsdale USA. The Complainant submitted a complaint on 15 February 2016.",
    "other_legal_proceedings": "Not applicable",
    "discussion_and_findings": "The Complainant’s allegations appear to be true, are supported by a considerable body of evidence and have remained undisputed.  Had the Respondent any reasonable arguments showing that the registered domain name at the centre of this dispute is one closely in connection with a business or trade mark in  which the Respondent has a legitimate interest then it is assumed that he would have demonstrated this in a timely response. None was received and therefore this Panellist has seen no evidence to suggest that the registration was based on any legitimate business interest or pre-existing trademark over which the Respondent had any form of legal rights. All the evidence suggests that the Complainant’s rights in the trade marks predate the Respondent’s registration of the Domain, which was registered on 6 August 2015. Furthermore, it should be noted that the Domain incorporates the Complainant’s trade mark “ALDI” merely adding common English word “DIRECT” which further enhances confusion as it suggests an Aldi online shopping website. Therefore, the Panel finds the Domain confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trade mark “ALDI”.\r\n\r \nThe Complainants have not licensed or otherwise authorised the Respondent to use the ALDI trade mark. The registration and use of the Domain disrupts the professional activities of the Complainant. The Respondent would therefore appear to have no right or legitimate interest in the Domain, nor any rights in the Trade Marks, or association with the Complainant whatsoever. Therefore, the Panel finds the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interest in the Domain.\r\n\r\nFinally, the Panel is of the opinion that the Domain has been registered and used in bad faith for the Domain has been intentionally used to attract internet users, for commercial gain, to the Respondent’s website by creating a likelihood of confusion with a name on which a right is recognized or established, such likelihood arising as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation or endorsement of the website of the Respondent. This inferred association, is utilised to pick up web traffic from those users attempting to view a domain which is associated with the Complainant. Instead, users are directed to various unrelated third party domains by way of holding page hosted at the Domain featuring paid sponsored links.",
    "decision": "For all the foregoing reasons, in accordance with Paragraphs B12 (b) and (c) of the Rules, the Panel orders that\r\n\r\nthe Complaint is Accepted and \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nthe domain name ALDIDIRECT.EU be transferred to the Complainant",
    "panelists": [
        null
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2016-06-13 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "I.      Disputed domain name: aldidirect.eu\r\n\r\nII.     Country of the Complainant: UK, country of the Respondent: UK\r\n\r\nIII.    Date of registration of the domain name: 06 August 2015\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\n1.\t[word\/combined\/figurative] trademark registered as indicated in Annex 1 of Complaint\r\n         2.   business identifier: ALDI\r\n        3.   company name: ALDI\r\n        4.  other: the Complainant submitted that, ALDI is a name which is recognised internationally and In addition, the Complainant also benefits from rights in passing of based on the substantial reputation and goodwill which the Complainant has in the ALDI name. The registration and use of the Domain disrupts the professional activities of the Complainant.\r\n\r\nV.    Response submitted: No\r\n\r\nVI.   Domain name is both identical and 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: The domain name has been registered by the Respondent without rights or legitimate interest in the name. ALDI is a name which is recognised internationally and protected by the Trade Marks of the Complainant which predate the registration of the disputed domain name by several years. In addition, the Complainant also benefits from rights in passing of based on the substantial reputation and goodwill which the Complainant has in the ALDI name.\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: a) it is inevitable that internet users will be confused into believing that the Domain has an association with the Complainant. The registration of the Domain therefore took unfair advantage of the Complainant’s rights. b) The Domain has been intentionally used to attract internet users, for commercial gain, to the Respondent’s website by creating a likelihood of confusion with a name on which a right is recognized or established, such likelihood arising as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation or endorsement of the website of the Respondent. c) the Domain incorporates the ALDI sign alongside the word “DIRECT” which further infers a connection with the Complainant and creates confusion as to the source of the Domain. This inferred association, is utilised to pick up web traffic from those users attempting to view a domain which is associated with the Complainant. Instead, users are directed to various unrelated third party domains by way of holding page hosted at the Domain featuring paid sponsored links.\r\n\r\n\r\nIX.   Other substantial facts the Panel considers relevant: All content which was previously hosted at the Domain has been removed and the Domain currently hosts the  standard holding page of the registrar (GoDaddy). This is likely, says the Complainant,  to have been as a result of a letter which was sent to the Respondent by the Complainant’s representatives notifying them of the Complainant’s rights to the Domain, although to date there has been had no response from the Respondent. The Complainant contends that this lack of response is further evidence that the Domain is abusive. Also, from the changes made, it can be inferred that the Respondent accepted that such content previously hosted at the Domain was abusive. Furthermore, the Respondent would appear to be engaged in a pattern of registering domain names which include the ALDI name, despite having no rights in the Trade Marks or legitimate association with the same, it is inferred that the Respondent registered these domain names, including the Domain, primarily for the purposes of selling, renting or otherwise transferring the domain names to the Complainant for valuable consideration.\r\n\r\nX.    Dispute Result: Transfer of the disputed domain name\r\nXI.   Procedural factors the Panel considers relevant: No Response was filed depriving the Panel of any evidence demonstrating any legitimate interests on the part of the Respondent.\r\n\r\nXII.  [If transfer to Complainant] Is Complainant eligible? Yes as evinced by Company House records",
    "decision_domains": [],
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}