{
    "case_number": "CAC-ADREU-001136",
    "time_of_filling": null,
    "domain_names": [],
    "case_administrator": null,
    "complainant": [],
    "complainant_representative": null,
    "respondent": [],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "Complainant is the public body which governs the village of \"Fiè allo Sciliar\".\r\n\r\nIn January 2006, Complainant applied for <fie.eu>. \r\n\r\nIts application has been ranked #1 in the Queue List.\r\n\r\nApplication has been rejected by Eurid since the Italian Governmental Validation Point considered that Complainant was not entitled to this domain name.\r\n\r\nComplainant also filed other applications for the same domain name in March and April 2006, but these applications are of little interest as far as this procedure is concerned.",
    "other_legal_proceedings": "None",
    "discussion_and_findings": "The application filed by Complainant in January 2006 is a so-called “article 10.3 application”. There can be no doubt on this point since the documentary evidence provided by Complainant specifically refers to article 10.3 of Regulation 874\/2004.\r\n\r\nThe main advantage of this special regime is to allow European countries to ensure that public bodies may apply for some domain names during the Sunrise Period.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nWho is eligible to article 10.3 application?\r\n------------------------------------------------------------\r\n\r\nThe answer is provided in article 10.1 of EC Regulation 874\/2004:\r\n\r\nArticle 10.1. “Holders of prior rights recognised or established by national and\/or Community law AND PUBLIC BODIES [we emphasize] shall be eligible to apply to register domain names during a period of phased registration before general registration of. eu domain\r\nstarts.”\r\n\r\nComplainant is, without any doubt, a public body in the sense of article 10.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nWho is in charge of the validation for article 10.3 applications?\r\n-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------\r\n\r\nArticle 13 of Regulation 874\/2004 creates two different regimes for the validation of applications: it begins by the common regime applicable, for example to trademark holders, and ends with the special regime applicable to public bodies:\r\n\r\n“Member States shall provide for validation concerning the names mentioned in Article 10(3). To that end, the Member States shall send to the Commission within two months following entry into force of this Regulation, a clear indication of the addresses to which documentary evidence is to be sent for verification. The Commission shall notify the Registry of these addresses.”\r\n\r\nIn respect thereof, all European countries have designated a so-called “Governmental Validation Point” (“GPV”). The list of all national GPV has been published on Eurid’s website. \r\n\r\nAs far as Italy is concerned, GPV is: ISCOM (Ministry of Communications).\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nWhich domain names are concerned by article 10.3 applications ?\r\n-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------\r\n\r\nAnswer is provided by Article 10.3 of Regulation 874\/2004:\r\n\r\n“The registration by a public body may consist of the complete name of the public body or the acronym that is generally used. Public bodies that are responsible for governing a particular geographic territory may also register the complete name of the territory for which they are responsible, and the name under which the territory is commonly known.”\r\n\r\nThe role of a national GPV is thus to assess whether or not:\r\n\r\nA) the applicant is a public body in the sense of article 10.1; and \r\n\r\nB) the applicant claims registration of a domain name that comply with article 10.3, i.e:\r\n\r\n- it is the complete name of the public body or the acronym that is generally used;\r\n\r\n- if the applicant is responsible for governing a particular geographic territory, it is the complete name of the territory for which the public body is responsible, and the name under which the territory is commonly known.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nApplication to the present case and conclusions\r\n---------------------------------------------------------------------\r\n\r\n\r\n1.\tUnder Regulation 874\/2004, public bodies received a quite favorable position since they are exonerated from any sort of appreciation by the normal validation agent, provided that their national GPV considers that they are entitled to apply for a domain name under article 10.3.\r\n\r\nAs recalled in case 00386 (STOCKOLM) : “The European Legislator did not establish an absolute right for a public body to the sole and exclusive ownership of the .eu domain for the geographical territory for which it was responsible. It did, however, give such public bodies considerable advantages over other applicants”.\r\n\r\n\r\n2.\tIt can be inferred from Eurid’s Response to Complaint that the Italian GVP considered that Complainant was not entitled to the FIE domain name:\r\n\r\n“As the Italian Governmental Validation Point considered that the Complainant was not entitled to the FIE domain name, the Respondent rejected the Complainant's application.”\r\n\r\nThe Panel comes to the same conclusion when reading the documentary evidence of the case: Complainant has provided several self-drafted documents but nothing issued or validated by the Italian GPV.\r\n\r\nAnother indication of this is the fact that even during this ADR procedure, Complainant did not provide the Panel with any sort of document originating from the Italian GPV.\r\n\r\nOf course, another explanation for this situation could be that Complainant simply omitted to request validation by the Italian GPV but the result is the same: this validation hasn’t been provided to the validation agent, nor is it provided to the Panel.\r\n\r\n\r\n3.\tIn the Panel view, when a public body clearly applies under the benefit of article 10.3, the validation by the national GPV is compulsory. Failing to obtain the GPV validation, Complainant is not entitled to apply under the favorable regime of article 10.3.\r\n\r\n\r\n4.\tAlso, going through the normal circuit for validation when the GPV refused to validate the application (or when the public body simply omits to request such a validation), is not an option. \r\n\r\nIt would conflict the letter and the aim of articles 13 and 14 of Regulation 874\/2004:\r\n- article 13 says that “Member States shall provide for validation concerning the names mentioned in Article 10(3)”\r\n- article 14 describes the normal circuit and clearly limit its scope to article 10.1 and 10.2 applications : “All claims for prior rights under Article 10(1) and (2) must be verifiable by documentary evidence which demonstrates the right under the law by virtue of which it exists”.\r\n\r\nSituation might have been different, should Complainant have applied in January 2006 on the basis of another prior right (nothing prevent a public body to apply under the special regime of article 10.3, and\/or under the benefit of another prior right as defined by article 10.2, provided that the normal procedure is followed including the validation of this prior right, but this is not the case in the present procedure since the application is clearly limited to the special public body regime).\r\n\r\n\r\n5.\tWhether or not the Italian GPV correctly assesses the situation of Complainant when it refused to validate its application, is a question that falls outside the scope of this ADR procedure.",
    "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 Denied",
    "panelists": [
        null
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2006-08-16 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "Article 13 of Regulation 874\/2004 creates two different regimes for the validation of applications: it begins by the common regime applicable, for example, to trademark holders, and ends with the special regime applicable to public bodies:\r\n\r\n “Member States shall provide for validation concerning the names mentioned in Article 10(3). To that end, the Member States shall send to the Commission within two months following entry into force of this Regulation, a clear indication of the addresses to which documentary evidence is to be sent for verification. The Commission shall notify the Registry of these addresses.”\r\n\r\nIn respect thereof, all European countries have designated a so-called “Governmental Validation Point” (“GPV”). The list of all national GPV has been published on Eurid’s website. As far as Italy is concerned, GPV is: ISCOM (Ministry of Communications).\r\n\r\nComplainant applied under the benefit of article 10.3 despite the fact that the Italian GPV did not validate its application for the domain name at stake.\r\n\r\nIn the Panel view, when a public body clearly applies under the benefit of article 10.3, the validation by the national GPV is compulsory. Failing to obtain this national validation, Complainant is not entitled to apply under this favorable regime.\r\n\r\nWhether or not the Italian GPV correctly assesses the situation of Complainant when it refused to validate its application, is a question that falls outside the scope of this ADR procedure.",
    "decision_domains": [],
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}