{
    "case_number": "CAC-ADREU-001886",
    "time_of_filling": null,
    "domain_names": [],
    "case_administrator": null,
    "complainant": [],
    "complainant_representative": null,
    "respondent": [],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "The Complainant applied for the Disputed Domain Name on the basis of its CTM registration 3177763 \"CTM Registration\". When requested to file the Documentary Evidence of its prior trade mark rights for GBG the Complainant mistakenly filed details of an Application no 4735122 instead of a copy of its CTM Registration.  The Application for the Disputed Domain Name was refused.",
    "other_legal_proceedings": "N\/A",
    "discussion_and_findings": "Article 12 (1) of Regulation 874\/2004 (\"the Regulation\") provides that Eurid should publish the rules for the Sunrise Period on its website (\"the Sunrise Rules\"). \r\n\r\nArticle 14 of the Regulalation provides:\r\n\r\n\"Every applicant shall submit documentary evidence that shows that he or she is the holder of the prior right claimed on the name in question. The documentary evidence shall be submitted to a validation agent indicated by the Registry. The applicant shall submit the evidence in such a way that it shall be received by the validation agent within 40 days from the submission of the application for the domain name. if the documentary evidence has not been received by this deadline the application for the domain name shall be rejected.\"\r\n\r\nChapter 1 Section 2 (1) (i) of the Sunrise Rules provides that:\r\n\r\n\"The first come first served principle ... during the Phased regitration Period means that the Registry effects registration of a particular Domain Name in response to the first Application received by the Registry in respect of that Domain Name ...subject to:\r\n(i) the receipt of Documentary Evidence by the Processing Agent within 40 calendar days following the date of receipt of the Application y the Registry; and \r\n(ii) validation of the existence of the Prior Right ..\" \r\n\r\nChapter VI, Section 21 (2) of the Sunrise Rules provides that:\r\n\r\n\"The Validation Agent examines whether the Applicant has a Prior Right to the name exclusively on the basis of a prima facie review of the first set of Documentary Evidence received and scanned by the Processing Agent (including the Documentary evidence received electronically whre applicable)      \r\n\r\nChapter VI, Section 21 (3) of the Sunrise Rules provides that:\r\n\r\n\"The Validation Agent is not obliged but it is permitted in tis sole discretion to conduct its own investigations into the circumstances of the Application, the Prior Right claimed and the Documentary Evidence produced.\"\r\n\r\nChapter VI, Section 22 (2) of the Sunrise Rules provides that:\r\n\r\n\"The Registry registers Domain Names on a first come, first servedbasis where it finds that the Applicant has demonstrated a Prior Right in acordance with Section 2 hereof.\"\r\n\r\nIt is common ground that a trade mark application cannot be a Prior Right under the Regulation and the Sunrise Rules.  \r\n\r\nFrom a review of the above provisions of the Regulation and Sunrise Rules it is clear that the Documentary Evidence submitted by the Applicant must show that the Applicant is the holder of a Prior Right. Due to a mistake of the Applicant in submitting a copy of a trade mark application and not its CTM registration it did not satisfy the requirements of the Sunrise Rules. The Respondent refused the Application as the Applicant had failed to demonstrate a Prior Right under the Regulation and the Sunrise Rules. In the opinion of the Panel the Respondent was right to do so and the Complaint must be dismissed.",
    "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": "2006-08-24 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "The Complainant applied for the Disputed Domain Name on the basis of its CTM registration 3177763 \"CTM Registration\". When requested to file the Documentary Evidence of its prior trade mark rights for GBG the Complainant mistakenly filed details of an Application no 4735122 instead of a copy of its CTM Registration.  The Application for the Disputed Domain Name was refused.\r\n\r\nThe Documentary Evidence submitted by the Applicant must show that the Applicant is the holder of a Prior Right. For these purpises a trade mark application is not sufficient under the Regulation or the Rules. Due to a mistake of the Applicant in submitting a copy of a trade mark application and not its CTM registration it did not satisfy the requirements of the Sunrise Rules. The Respondent refused the Application as the Applicant had failed to demonstrate a Prior Right under the Regulation and the Sunrise Rules. In the opinion of the Panel the Respondent was right to do so and the Complaint must be dismissed.",
    "decision_domains": [],
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}