{
    "case_number": "CAC-ADREU-004656",
    "time_of_filling": null,
    "domain_names": [],
    "case_administrator": null,
    "complainant": [],
    "complainant_representative": null,
    "respondent": [],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "The Complainant is a registered co-operative society incorporated under German law, having its principal place of business in Bochum, Germany. The Complainant, the first ethical and ecological bank in Germany, has been doing business under its company name “GLS Gemeinschaftsbank e.G.” since as early as 1974 \r\n\r\nThrough use of the company name “GLS Gemeinschaftsbank e.G.” and its shortened version Complainant has acquired company name rights in the designations “GLS Gemeinschaftsbank” and “GLS Bank”.\r\n\r\nBesides the afore-mentioned company name rights Complainant is the proprietor of German trademark 305 27 689 “GLS” and registered for numerous services of international class 36, of international registration 903 816 “GLS” based on the afore-said German trademark, among others covering the EC as well as of Community trademark 2 886 455 “GLS Gemeinschaftsbank eG”.\r\n\r\nMoreover, Complainant is the owner of numerous domain names incorporating the designation “GLS” including the domain name “gls.de”, the domain name “www.gls-bank.de”, the domain name “glsbank.de”, the domain name “gls.eu” and the domain name “glsgemeinschaftsbank.eu”\r\n\r\nOne of Complainant’s co-operation partners, working closely together with Complainant and complementing its range of services, GLS Treuhand e.V. was incorporated as a registered association under German law under the name “Gemeinnützige Treuhandstelle e.V.” in 1961\r\n\r\nBy contract dated September 23, 2005 Complainant permitted Gemeinnützige Treuhandstelle e.V. to change its name to “GLS Treuhand e.V.” for as long as the close co-operation would last.The said contract also stipulates that GLS Treuhand e.V. does not have the right to register the designation “GLS” as a trademark nor to acquire any other sort of exclusive rights. Moreover, the Complainant is obliged to defend the designation “GLS” against infringement by third parties. \r\nComplainant is also the owner of the domain names “glstreuhand.de” and “gls-treuhand.de”.\r\n\r\nFor reasons of procedural economy and in accordance with the GLS Treuhand e.V. has permitted Complainant to enforce the rights in its name “GLS Treuhand e.V.” on its behalf and to request transfer of the contested domain name “glstreuhand.eu” to Complainant.\r\n\r\nSince Respondent is in default the Panel has not been provided with specific information on Respondent and Respondents activities, apart from those information put forward by the Complainant as stated below. \r\n \r\nThe disputed domain name gls-bank.eu was registered on 12 july 2006, gls-gemeinshaftsbank was registered on 18 July 2006 and the domain name glstreuhand.eu was registered on 22 August 2006  and the complaint was filed on 19 September 2007. After having approved the Complaint the ADR Center initiated the ADR proceedings on 5 October 2007. On 21 November 2007 a notification of Respondent Default was issued. After having received his declaration of independence and impartiality the ADR Center appointed Knud Wallberg to serve as Panelist on 7 December 2007. \r\n \r\nThe contested domain names gls-bank.eu and glstreuhand.eu are both used for a standard web-page stating \"this domain is for sale\" while the domain name gls-gmeinshaftsbank.eu is currently inactive.",
    "other_legal_proceedings": "The Panel has is not aware of other legal proceedings which are pending or decided and which relate to the disputed domain name. However, the Complainant has indicated that it seems probable that the contested domain names are subject of a court proceeding against the Respondent initiated by EURid. Even if this is correct this does not prevent Complainant from initiating this ADR procedure, since Complainant is not a party to the other procedure, and will not necessarrily benefit from the outcome of it.",
    "discussion_and_findings": "According to article 21,1 of the Public Policy Rules (Commisssion Regulation (EC) No 874\/2004 and paragraph B 11 (d) of the ADR Rules a registered domain name shall be subject to revocation provided that each of the three following elements are satisfied: \r\n \r\n(A) The domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service    \r\n     mark in which the Complainant has rights that are recognised or established by national  a   \r\n     and\/or Community law;  and \r\n(B) Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name;  and \r\n(C) The domain name has been registered or is being used in bad faith. \r\n \r\nThe Respondent is in default and paragraph B 10 (a) of the ADR Rules states that the Panel may consider the failure to comply with the time limits for filing a Response as grounds to accept the claims of the Complainant. Paragraph B 10 (b) of the ADR Rules further states that if a party does not comply with any provision of, or requirement under, the Rules or the Supplemental Rules or any request from the Panel, the Panel shall draw such inferences there from as it considers appropriate. \r\n \r\nA. Identical or Confusingly Similar \r\n \r\nThe contested domain names all contains Complainant’s distinctive and protected trademark GLS in full.  Neither the addition of the descriptive terms \"bank\", \"gemeinshaftsbank\" or \"treuhand\" as suffix nor the inclusion of the gTLD denomination “.eu” alters the fact that the domain names are confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademark. The Panel also notes that the contested domain names are all confusingly similar to Complainants company name rights or company name rights that Complainant is entitled to invoke under these proceedings. \r\n \r\nConsequently, the Panel finds that the disputed domain names are confusingly similar to names in which the Complainant has rights. \r\n \r\nB. Rights or Legitimate Interests \r\n \r\nComplainant alleges that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the domain names. The Respondent has not rebutted this allegation, nor is there material before the Panel demonstrating that such rights or interests may exist. \r\n \r\nThe Panel therefore finds that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name.   \r\n \r\nC. Registered or Used in Bad Faith \r\n \r\nThe burden of proof that all the requirements of Article 21, 1 of the PPR are fulfilled lies with the Complainant. \r\n \r\nComplainant’s trademarks are registered in the European Union and thus also in the home country of the Respondent, the United Kingdom. \r\n \r\nThe Respondent has not rebutted the substantiated allegations put forward by the Complainant. The Panel finds that it is unlikely that the contested domain names have been registered without prior knowledge of Complainant and Complainants rights and further finds that the registration of the domain names are obviously made with the purpose of selling them to Complainant or to others. Further, the registration and current use of the domain names are likely to disrupt or otherwise harm the business interests of the Complainant.\r\n\r\nIt is further evident that the Respondent is engaged in a pattern of such conduct i.e. of registering domain names that contain trade marks or other business identifiers belonging to others that are recognised by national or Community law.\r\n \r\nThe Panel is therefore satisfied that the domain name has been registered in bad faith.   \r\n \r\nIn conclusion, considering all the facts and evidence, the Panel finds that all the requirements of paragraph 21, 1 of the PPR and of paragraph B 11(d) of the ADR Rules are met.",
    "decision": "For all the foregoing reasons, in accordance with Paragraph B12 of the Rules, the Panel orders that the domain names GLS-BANK.EU, GLS-GEMEINSCHAFTSBANK.EU and  GLSTREUHAND.EU be transferred to the Complainant.",
    "panelists": [
        null
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2008-01-04 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "The contested domain names all contain the trademark GLS in which the Complainant holds rights and they are also identical or at least similar to company names in which the Complainant holds rights or has been granted authority to enforce under these proceeding. Complainant filed a complaint alleging that the domain names were confusingly to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights and identical or similar to Complainant´s company name rights, that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and that the domain name has been registered or is being used in bad faith. The Respondent was in default and did thus not rebut the allegations put forward by the Complainant. Since the allegations were substantiated in the Complaint the Panel found that all the requirements of Paragraph 21, 1 of the Public Policy Rules and Paragraph B 11 (b) and (d) of the ADR Rules were met and thus decided that the contested domain names should be transferred to the Complainant.",
    "decision_domains": [],
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}