{
    "case_number": "CAC-ADREU-000279",
    "time_of_filling": null,
    "domain_names": [],
    "case_administrator": null,
    "complainant": [],
    "complainant_representative": null,
    "respondent": [],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "On December 7, 2005, Muller et Cie filed an application for the registration of the domain name “MULLER” on the ground of a French registered trademark. Muller et Cie was the first applicant for said domain name.\r\nOn January 10, 2006, Muller et Cie submitted as Documentary Evidence an extract from an on-line database operated by the French Official Trademark Office.\r\nEURid has accepted the application of Muller et Cie to register the domain name MULLER. This acceptance within the first phase registration (Sunrise period) is subject to dispute.",
    "other_legal_proceedings": "",
    "discussion_and_findings": "According to article 10.2 of the Commission Regulation (EC) n° 874\/2004 “the holders of prior rights recognised 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”. By virtue to the same article, “prior rights’ shall be understood to include, inter alia, registered national and community trademarks (….)”.\r\n\r\nAccording to article 13)2)ii of the Sunrise rules, in order to prove that a trademark is registered it is sufficient to submit an extract from an official on–line database operated and\/or managed by the relevant national trademark office.\r\n\r\nAfter review of the Documentary Evidence, the Panel finds that Muller et Cie has provided an extract from ICIMARQUE’s database which is precisely an official on-line database operated by the French Trademarks Office. Said extract demonstrates that the French trademark “MULLER” is registered by Muller et Cie since 1982 and has been duly renewed. Consequently, this document meets the requirements of article 13)2)ii of the Sunrise rules.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant contents that the Muller et Cie has two community trademark applications and that one of these applications is currently being opposed. None of these applications has mature to registration.\r\n\r\nThe Panel considers this matter irrelevant. The rules did not impose to provide several prior rights in order to register a domain name. Therefore, an established national trademark’s right is sufficient as prior right and as a base for the application during the Sunrise period according to article 10.2 of the Commission Regulation (EC) n° 874\/2004\r\n \r\nIn accordance with article 14 of the Commission Regulation (EC) n° 874\/2004, “the Registry shall register the domain name, on the first come, first served basis, if it finds that the applicant has demonstrated a prior right (…)”\r\n\r\nEURid contents that Muller et Cie was the “first come” regarding the domain name <MULLER.EU> and the Complainant did not dispute this fact.\r\n\r\nConsequently, in accordance with the article 14 of the Commission Regulation (EC) n° 874\/2004, EURid shall accept the application of Muller et Cie.  \r\n\r\nAs a result, the decision of EURid to accept the application of Muller et Cie does not conflict with the Commission Regulations n° 874\/2004 and n° 733\/2002.",
    "decision": "For all the foregoing reasons, in accordance with Paragraphs B12 (b) and (c) of the Rules, the Panel orders that the Complaint is denied.",
    "panelists": [
        null
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": null,
    "informal_english_translation": "The Panel agrees with EURid that Muller et Cie has demonstrated prior right in accordance with article 13)2)ii of the Sunrise rules and article 10.2 of the Commission Regulation (EC) n° 874\/2004. The Documentary Evidence clearly demonstrates that Muller et Cie’s prior right is a registered national trademark. \r\n\r\nEURid accepted the application of Muller et Cie to register the domain name on the first come, first served basis and in accordance with article 10 and 14 of the Commission Regulation (EC) n° 874\/2004.\r\n\r\nThe Panel finds that Complainant has failed to demonstrate that EURid’s decision conflicts with the Commission Regulations.\r\n\r\nAs a result, the decision of EURid does not conflict with the Commission Regulations n° 874\/2004 and n° 733\/2002 \r\n\r\nFor all the foregoing reasons, in accordance with Paragraphs B12 (b) and (c) of the Rules, the Panel orders that the Complaint is denied.",
    "decision_domains": [],
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}