In the present case, there are two Complainants.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Complainant 1 is a company incorporated in the United States in 2010 and is among the world’s leading manufacturers of golf shoes, apparel, and related equipment, marketed under the “TRUE LINKSWEAR” brand name. Its products are primarily distributed in the United States and also in Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom, with plans to expand delivery to the European Union via its UK e‑shop.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
The TRUE LINKSWEAR brand enjoys market recognition, as evidenced by coverage in Forbes, favourable expert reviews on MyGolfSpy and GOLF, and consistently high customer ratings (4.57\/5 from over 4,300 reviews). Claimant 1 operates the domain name <truelinkswear.com> and is the proprietor of EUIPO word trademark No. 9685447 “TRUE LINKSWEAR” (priority date: 26 January 2011, class 25).<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Complainant 2, CityGolf.CZ – golfové obchody, s.r.o., is a company incorporated in the Czech Republic and serves as the authorised distributor and exclusive trademark licensee of Claimant 1 in the Czech Republic and Continental Europe under a formal Distribution Agreement form 20 June 2024. It operates two official City Golf retail stores located in Prague and Brno.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Pursuant to a written mandate and the Distribution Agreement, Complainant 2 is authorised to hold the domain name <truelinkswear.eu> on behalf of Claimant 1.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
The disputed domain name <truelinkswear.eu> has been registered on 21 May 2018.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
The Complainants request the disputed domain name <truelinkswear.eu> to be transferred to the Complainant 2 who meets the eligibility requirements under Article 3 of Regulation (EU) 2019\/517 (the “Regulation”).<\/p>", "other_legal_proceedings": "
The Panel is not aware of any legal proceedings which relate to the disputed domain name.<\/p>", "discussion_and_findings": "
Under Article 4(4) of the Regulation and the Article B11(d)(1) of the ADR Rules, the disputed domain name is subject to revocation if it is identical or confusingly similar to a name in respect of which a right is established by the EU or national law, and where:<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
- It has been registered by its holder without rights or legitimate interest in the name; or<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
- It has been registered or is being used in bad faith.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Furthermore, Under the applicable Regulation, domain names in the .eu TLD may be allocated only to eligible parties. Pursuant to Article 3 of Regulation (EU) 2019\/517, eligible parties include:<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
- an undertaking that is established in the Union; and<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
- an organization that is established in the Union, without prejudice to the application of national law.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
In the present case, there are two Complainants, both legal entities: Complainant 1, a United States company, is the proprietor of an EU trademark, and Complainant 2, a company incorporated in the Czech Republic, is the exclusive licensee of that trademark for the Czech Republic and Continental Europe.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Eligibility criteria<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
As a preliminary matter, it is necessary to assess the eligibility criteria of the Complainants, given that only Complainant 2 meets the requirements of Regulation, while only Complainant 1 is the proprietor of the relevant EU right, namely the EU trademark.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
In this regard, it should be noted that Complainant 2 is the exclusive licensee of the EU trademark. Pursuant to Section 2(2) of Czech Act No. 221\/2006 Coll., on the Enforcement of Industrial Property Rights and Protection of Trade Secrets, the exclusive holder of a licence to such rights (including rights to trademarks) is entitled to enforce those rights, provided that the proprietor consents. In the present case, such consent has been duly granted by Complainant 1 base on its written consent submitted as evidence.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Accordingly, Complainant 2 has standing to act in these proceedings and, as a legal entity incorporated in the Czech Republic, meets the eligibility criteria under Article 3 of Regulation (EU) 2019\/517. Furthermore, Complainant 1 has expressly authorised that the disputed domain name be transferred to Complainant 2. The preliminary issue of eligibility is therefore resolved in agreement with the petition of the Complainants.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Identical and\/or Confusingly Similar<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
With regard to the similarity test under paragraph B11(d)(1)(i) of the ADR Rules, the Panel finds that the disputed domain name <truelinkswear.eu> is identical to the TRUE LINKSWEAR EU trademark and that the only difference being the technical “.eu” suffix, which is however irrelevant for the assessment of similarity.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Therefore, the Panel concludes that the first condition set forth under Article 4(4) of the Regulation and the Article B11(d)(1) of the ADR Rules has been fulfilled.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Rights or Legitimate Interests<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
While the overall burden of proof in domain names disputes is on the complainant, proving a respondent’s lacks rights or legitimate interests in a domain name may result in the often-impossible task of “proving a negative” information that is often primarily within the knowledge or control of the respondent. It is therefore generally accepted, that where a complainant makes out a prima facie case that the respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests, the burden of production on this element shifts to the respondent to come forward with relevant evidence demonstrating rights or legitimate interests in the domain name.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
In this case, the Panel finds that the Respondent has neither demonstrated nor even asserted in these proceedings that it has any rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name. On the contrary, the evidence submitted by the Complainants confirms that the Respondent holds no exclusive rights to the name “truelinkswear” and has not been granted any authorisation by the Complainants to use the TRUE LINKSWEAR trademark.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Consequently, and in the absence of a Response, the Panel finds that the second condition as stated in the Article B1(b)(10)(ii) of the ADR Rules has been proved.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Registration or Use in Bad Faith<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
The Panel finds that in this case, the need to assert that the Respondent’s conduct - registration or use of the disputed domain name in bad faith under paragraph B11(d)(1)(iii) of the ADR Rules does not have to be assessed given that the Complainants have satisfied the requirements of the Articles B1(b)(10)(i) and B11(d)(1)(ii) of the ADR Rules, the Panel finds the Complaint as justified.<\/p>\n
<\/p>", "decision": "
For all the foregoing reasons, in accordance with Paragraphs B12 (b) and (c) of the Rules, the Panel orders that the domain name truelinkswear.eu be transferred to the Complainant 2.<\/p>", "panelists": [ "Hana Císlerová" ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2025-08-04 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "
I. Disputed domain name: [truelinkswear.eu]
II. Country of the Complainant: [Complainant 1 : United States, Complainant 2: Czech Republic], country of the Respondent: [France]
III. Date of registration of the domain name: [21.05.2018]
IV. Rights relied on by the Complainant (B(11)(f) ADR Rules) on which the Panel based its decision:
1. [word] trademark registered in [EU], reg. No. [9685447], for the term [TRUE LINKSWEAR], filed on [26.01.2011], registered on [05.07.2011] in respect of goods and services in class [25]
V. Response submitted: No
VI. Domain name\/s is\/are identical to the protected right\/s of the Complainant
VII. Rights or legitimate interests of the Respondent (B(11)(f) ADR Rules):
1. No
2. Why: No authorisation, no prior right to the name in the EU.
VIII. Bad faith of the Respondent (B(11)(e) ADR Rules):
1. N\/A
2. Why: Not applicable - both requirements of the Articles B1(b)(10)(i) and B11(d)(1)(ii) of the ADR Rules have been satisfied.
IX. Other substantial facts the Panel considers relevant: N\/A
X. Dispute Result: Transfer of the disputed domain name
XI.
XII. Is Complainant eligible? [Yes - Complainant 2]<\/p>",
"decision_domains": [],
"panelist": null,
"panellists_text": null
}