{
    "case_number": "CAC-ADREU-005571",
    "time_of_filling": null,
    "domain_names": [],
    "case_administrator": null,
    "complainant": [],
    "complainant_representative": null,
    "respondent": [],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "The Complainant is a known Airline, which operates regular flights from Bregenz to Vienna and other destinations in Austria and Germany.  \r\n\r\nThe Complainant applied for the community trademark registration for “InterSky” in October 2005 for classes 37, 39, 41 and received the registration from OHIM Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market on 22nd of September 2008 No 004702767.  \r\n\r\nThe Respondent has registered the disputed domain name on October 31, 2006. The domain name is not currently used and it has never been used since it was registered.  \r\n\r\nOn December 4, 2009, the Complainant initiated an ADR proceeding. The Complainant submitted a Complaint against the Respondent claiming that the Respondent registered the “InterSky.eu” domain name without rights or legitimate interest and in bad faith and that therefore the registration should be declared abusive within the meaning of Article 21 of EC Regulation No. 874\/2004.  \r\n\r\nThe ADR Center did not receive any Respondent’s communication. The Respondent did not file a Response to the Complaint and did not provide any communication in the required period. On February 2, 2010, the Czech Arbitration Court issued a Notification of Respondent’s Default.",
    "other_legal_proceedings": "The Panel has no knowledge of other legal proceedings pending or decided and which relate to the disputed domain name.",
    "discussion_and_findings": "1. For granting the Complainant's request for the transfer of the disputed domain name, the Panel has to analyse whether the Complainant demonstrated that the requirements of Article 21.1 of EC Regulation No. 874\/2004 and Paragraph B.11(d)(1) of the ADR Rules are satisfied.\r\n\r\n2. In accordance with Article 21.1 of EC Regulation No. 874\/2004 and Paragraph B.11(d)(1) of the ADR Rules, in order to succeed, the Complainant must establish the following elements: \r\n(a) the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a name in respect of which a right (of the Complainant recognised or established by national and\/or Community law; and either \r\n(b) the domain name has been registered by the Respondent without rights or legitimate interest in the domain name; or \r\n(c) the domain name has been registered or is being used in bad faith.  \r\n\r\n\r\n 2.1. In connection to the first element, the Panel finds that the Complainant provided evidence according to the requirements of Article 21 (1) EC Regulation No. 874\/2004 that the  disputed domain name is identical to the Complainant’s Community trademark \"InterSky\". Further, the Respondent’s registration of the disputed domain name has a later date than the date of request for registration of the trademark.\r\n  \r\n2.2. The Panel considers the third element, the registration and use in bad faith of the disputed domain name. The disputed domain name is not currently used and no evidence has been put forward that it ever was in use. The Complainant also ascertains, and the Panel at its own investigation found it true, that the Respondent registered several domain names under .eu and has engaged in abusive domain name registration and use of the domain names. \r\n\r\nSuch circumstances confirm that the disputed domain name has been registered and it has been used in bad faith in the sense of article 21(3) (b) (ii) from Ec Regulation No. 874\/2004. The Panel notes that the Complainant alleges that there are circumstances of bad faith in the sense of article 21 (3) (a) of EC Regulation No. 874\/2004, but the Panel has not found too much support for this allegation. \r\n\r\nIn finding the above, the Panel relies also on Default of the Respondent to reply to the Complainant's allegations. According to Article 22.10 of EC Regulation No. 874\/2004 and Paragraph B.10(a) of the ADR Rules if a party fails to respond within the given deadlines, the Panel shall proceed to a decision on the Complaint, and may consider the failure to respond as grounds to accept the claims of the counterparty.\r\n\r\n3. Because the Complainant is an entity eligible to be the holder of .eu domain name in accordance with the Article 4(2) b) of Regulation 733\/2002, the Panel orders that the domain name InterSky.eu be transferred to the Complainant.",
    "decision": "For all the foregoing reasons, in accordance with Paragraphs B12 (b) and (c) of the Rules, the Panel orders that\r\n\r\n\r\nthe domain name INTERSKY be transferred to the Complainant",
    "panelists": [
        null
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2010-03-11 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "The Complainant brought an action against the Respondent for a speculative and abusive registration of the domain name “intersky.eu”. The Complainant is the owner of the Community trademark „InterSky”. The Panelist considered that the disputed domain name is identical to the Complainant’s right derived of the trademark.  \r\nThe Respondent did not respond to the Complaint.  \r\nThe Panel found that the disputed domain name had been registered in bad faith because the disputed domain name is not currently used and no evidence has been put forward that it ever was in use. The Respondent registered several domain names under .eu and has engaged in abusive domain name registration and use. The Panel therefore ordered that the disputed domain name be transferred to the Complainant.",
    "decision_domains": [],
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}