{ "case_number": "CAC-ADREU-008834", "time_of_filling": "2025-09-08 21:03:23", "domain_names": [ "tabschocolate.eu" ], "case_administrator": " Iveta Špiclová (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)", "complainant": [ "TABS LABS LLC" ], "complainant_representative": "Mr. Rajesh Fotedar (Cognition IP P.C.)", "respondent": [ "Nauris Birznieks" ], "respondent_representative": null, "factual_background": "

The Complainant, TABS LABS LLC<\/strong>, is a U.S. company that launched the sales of Tabs chocolate product in December 2021. <\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

During the period December 2021- June 2023 there was web traffic from Germany to Complainant's websites, there were 9 orders from customers with billing address in Germany and there were 29 customer IDs associated with unique German user accounts in Complainant's e-commerce system. <\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Respondent, Nauris Birznieks<\/strong>, registered the disputed domain name <tabschocolate.eu> <\/strong>June 28, 2023 and is operating a business selling chocolate under the brand \"Tabs\" within the EU and UK.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Complainant has registered the following trademarks after the registration of the disputed domain name:<\/p>\n

International trademark registration \"Tabs\", No.1817532, registered on February 20, 2024, designated, among others for EU and UK;<\/p>\n

US trademark registration \"Tabs\", No. 7819172, registered on June 3, 2025;<\/p>\n

US trademark registration \"tt\" 7839760, registered on June 24, 2025; <\/p>\n

US trademark \"tt\" 7844469, registered on June 24, 2025.

<\/p>\n

Respondent has registered the following trademarks after the registration of the disputed domain name:<\/p>\n

EU trademark \"Tabs\" 018977034, filed on January 22, 2024, registered on May 9, 2024;<\/p>\n

UK trademark \"Tabs\" UK00004067958, filed on June 25, 2024, registered on November 29, 2024.<\/p>", "other_legal_proceedings": "

The Panel is not aware of any pending or decided legal proceedings related to the disputed domain name.<\/span><\/p>", "discussion_and_findings": "

In accordance to Article 4 (4) of Regulation (EU) 2019\/517 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 March 2019 on the implementation and functioning of the .eu top-level domain name and amending and repealing Regulation (EC) No 733\/2002 and repealing Commission Regulation (EC) No 874\/2004 (hereinafter referred to as: ‘Regulation’) a domain name may be revoked, and where necessary subsequently transferred to another party, following an appropriate ADR or judicial procedure, in accordance with the principles and procedures on the functioning of the .eu TLD laid down pursuant to Article 11, where that name is identical or confusingly similar to a name in respect of which a right is established by Union or national law, and where it:<\/p>\n

(a) has been registered by its holder without rights or legitimate interest in the name; or<\/p>\n

(b) has been registered or is being used in bad faith.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

It is undisputed between the Parties that the Complainant’s registered trademarks were obtained subsequent to the registration of the disputed domain name. The central issue in contention is whether the Complainant’s commercial activities before the registration of the domain name gave rise to enforceable rights under German trademark law, such that they may be considered rights established by Union or national law, as the Complainant did not present any consumer surveys, media coverage, or other type of industry recognition, which could have supported the existence of trade significance. <\/p>\n

The Panel finds that, notwithstanding the niche nature of the product in question, a limited number of sales per calendar year within the German market combined with modest web traffic to the Complainant’s website does not meet the threshold of trade significance (Verkehrsgeltung), which under German trademark law requires substantial recognition. Therefore, the disputed domain name was not identical or confusingly similar to a name in respect of which a right is established by Union or national law and the first condition set forth under Article 4(4) of the Regulation and Paragraph B11(d)(1)(i) of the ADR Rules is not fulfilled and there are no grounds for transferring the domain name.<\/p>\n

<\/span><\/p>\n

While the Panel concludes that the Complainant’s business activities do not establish trade significance (Verkehrsgeltung) within the meaning of German trademark law, it does not consider the Complaint to constitute an abuse of the ADR procedure. Accordingly, the Panel rejects the Respondent’s request for a finding of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.<\/span><\/p>", "decision": "

For all the foregoing reasons, in accordance with Paragraphs B12 (b) and (c) of the Rules, the Panel orders that the Complaint is Denied.<\/p>", "panelists": [ "Viive Naslund" ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2025-10-27 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "

I. Disputed domain name: tabschocolate.eu<\/b>

II. Country of the Complainant: USA, country of the Respondent: Estonia

III. Date of registration of the domain name: 28 June 2023

IV. Rights relied on by the Complainant (B(11)(f) ADR Rules) on which the Panel based its decision:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. International word trademark, reg. No. 1817532, , registered on 20 February 2024in respect of goods and services in classes 5, 44.<\/li>\n
  2. Word trademark registered in US, reg. No. 7819172, filed on 16 February 2024, registered on 03 June 2025 in respect of goods and services in classes 044.<\/li>\n
  3. Word trademark registered in US, reg. No. 7839760, filed on 16 February 2024, registered on 24 June 2025 in respect of goods and services in classes 005.<\/li>\n
  4. Word trademark registered in US, reg. No. 7844469, filed on 16 February 2024, registered on 24 June 2025 in respect of goods and services in classes 044.<\/li>\n
  5. Unregistered trademark: unregistered German trademark rights in the TABS mark<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
      <\/ol>\n



      V. Response submitted: Yes

      VI. Domain name is neither identical nor confusingly similar to the protected right\/s of the Complainant

      VII. Rights or legitimate interests of the Respondent (B(11)(f) ADR Rules):
      1. Yes
      2. Why: No indication to the contrary<\/span>


      VIII. Bad faith of the Respondent (B(11)(e) ADR Rules):
      1. No
      2. Why: No indication to the contrary<\/span>

      IX. Other substantial facts the Panel considers relevant: None

      X. Dispute Result: Complaint denied

      XI. Procedural factors the Panel considers relevant: None

      <\/p>", "decision_domains": [], "panelist": null, "panellists_text": null }