{ "case_number": "CAC-ADREU-007303", "time_of_filling": null, "domain_names": [ "llusar.eu" ], "case_administrator": "Aneta Jelenová (Case admin)", "complainant": [ "ANTONIO LLUSAR Y CIA, S.L. ( )" ], "complainant_representative": null, "respondent": [ "Jesus Llusar" ], "respondent_representative": null, "factual_background": "The Complainant in this proceeding is ANTONIO LLUSAR & CIA, S.L., a Spanish company that operates in the field of commercialization of fruits, especially citrus fruit. It mainly trades its products under the mark LLUSAR.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant is seeking the transfer of the domain . \r\n\r\nThe claim is based on rights in a trademark and on bad faith registration primarily for the purpose of disrupting the professional activities of a competitor. \r\n\r\nThe Complainant has documented that it is the owner of European Union Trademark LLUSAR (device) no. 001659028, registered on August 14, 2001. \r\n\r\nThe Respondent, Mr. Jesus Llusar, has established a legitimate interest in the domain by virtue of his surname. \r\n\r\nThe disputed domain name is not used and apparently has not been used since its registration on July 3, 2006.\r\n\r\nThe Respondent in its defense has affirmed only that that the disputed domain name has been held by him for ten years and that Llusar is his family name.", "other_legal_proceedings": "To the knowledge of the Panel, there are no other legal proceedings pending or decided that relate to the domain name ", "discussion_and_findings": "Article 21 of Regulation No. 874\/2004 stipulates:\r\n\r\n“Speculative and abusive registrations\r\n\r\n1. 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\r\n(a)\thas been registered by its holder without rights or legitimate interest in the name; or\r\n(b)\thas been registered or is being used in bad faith.”\r\n\r\nHere, the Panel wishes to emphasize that the fulfilment of any of these two criteria individually is sufficient (i.e. either registration without rights or legitimate interests or registration and use in bad faith). This is the principal characteristic of the ADR for .EU domain names. It is also the main difference from the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) for generic Top Level Domains. \r\n\r\nI. The dispute domain name is identical or confusingly similar\r\n\r\nThe disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the name in which the Complainant has prior rights. In fact, there is no doubt that the domain name is identical to the textual and main part of the Complainant’s trademark LLUSAR. Paragraph B11(d)(1)(i) of the Rules is therefore met. \r\n\r\nII. Registration and use in bad faith\r\n\r\nHowever, since the Respondent has legitimate rights and an interest in the name LLUSAR by virtue of his surname, the Complainant has failed to satisfy Paragraph B11(d)(1)(ii) of the Rules (i.e. the Respondent’s lack of rights on or legitimate interest in the name LLUSAR).\r\n\r\nNevertheless, the Complainant has given a prima facie demonstration that the disputed domain name has not been used since its registration and that the respondent should have known of the complainant's activity and rights to the trademark LLUSAR when registering the domain name .\r\n\r\nThe Complainant has also given sufficient elements to infer that the Respondent himself and\/or at least a close component of his family (his sister) is a competitor of the complainant. \r\nAlthough the Complainant's assertion of the family link between Jesus Llusar and Isabelle Dal Soglio Llusar has not been supported by documents, the Panel, owing to the fact that it would have been extremely simple for the Respondent to prove the contrary or at least to rebut this claim, considers the Respondent's silence an admission of the above indicated link between himself and Ms. Isabelle.\r\nThe Panel is of the opinion that the absence of a response to the Complainant’s cease and desist letter is a further element from which to infer the Respondent’s bad faith. \r\nTherefore, the Panel considers that the disputed domain name was registered and being used in bad faith by the Respondent pursuant to Article 21 (3) b) ii) and Article 21 (3) c) of Regulation 874\/2004 and that therefore Paragraph B11(d)(1)(iii) of the Rules is also met.", "decision": "For all the foregoing reasons, in accordance with Paragraphs B12 (b) and (c) of the Rules, the Panel orders that the domain name LLUSAR.EU be transferred to the Complainant", "panelists": [ null ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2016-10-13 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "The disputed domain name is identical to the textual and main part of Complainant’s trademark LLUSAR. \r\n\r\nThe Respondent, Jesus Llusar, has legitimate rights and an interest in the name LLUSAR by virtue of his surname. Thus the Complainant failed to satisfy Paragraph B11(d)(1)(ii) of the Rules.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant has given a prima facie demonstration that the disputed domain name has not been used since its registration and that the Respondent should have known of the Complainant's activity and rights to the trademark LLUSAR when registering the domain name .\r\n\r\nThe Complainant has also given sufficient elements to infer that the Respondent himself and\/or at least a close component of his family (his sister) is a competitor of the Complainant. \r\n\r\nThe Respondent has not contested the Complainant's claims, which are therefore considered true by this Panel.\r\n\r\nTherefore, the Panel considers that the disputed domain name was registered in bad faith by the Respondent pursuant to Article 21 (3) b) ii) and Article 21 (3) c) of Regulation 874\/2004 and that therefore Paragraph B11(d)(1)(iii) of the Rules is also met.\r\n\r\nThe Panel orders that the domain name be transferred to the Complainant.", "decision_domains": [], "panelist": null, "panellists_text": null }