WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION Groupement des Cartes Bancaires CB v. Nicos Panayiou, Registrant [2791749] Case No. D2010-0875 1. The Parties
The Complainant is Groupement des Cartes Bancaires CB of Paris, France, represented by Inlex Conseil, France.
The Respondent is Nicos Panayiou, Registrant [2791749] of Nicosia, Cyprus. 2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name (the “Domain Name”) is registered with Moniker Online Services, LLC. (the “Registrar”). 3. Procedural History
The Complaint was filed with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (the “Center”) on May 31, 2010.
The Center transmitted its request for registrar verification to the Registrar on May 31, 2010 and again on June 1, 2010. The Registrar replied on June 1, 2010, confirming that it had received a copy of the Complaint, that the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy” or “UDRP”) applied to the Domain Name, that the Domain Name would expire on May 11, 2011, and had been locked, and that the registration agreement was in English. The Registrar also provided the full contact details held on its WhoIs database in respect of the Domain Name, according to which the registrant was the Respondent. The Registrar did not dispute that the registration agreement contained a submission by the registrant to the jurisdiction of the courts where the Registrar is located.
The Complainant submitted a minor correction to the Complainant, concerning the numbering of the annexes, on June 3, 2010.
The Center verified that the Complaint satisfied the formal requirements of the UDRP, the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Rules”), and the WIPO Supplemental Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Supplemental Rules”).
In accordance with paragraphs 2(a) and 4(a) of the Rules, the Center formally notified the Respondent of the Complaint, and the proceedings commenced on June 4, 2010. In accordance with paragraph 5(a) of the Rules, the due date for Response was June 24, 2010. The Respondent did not submit any response. Accordingly, the Center notified the Respondent's default on June 28, 2010.
The Center appointed Jonathan Turner as the sole panelist in this matter on July 8, 2010. The Panel has submitted the Statement of Acceptance and Declaration of Impartiality and Independence, as required by the Center to ensure compliance with paragraph 7 of the Rules.
Having reviewed the file, the Panel finds that the Complaint complied with applicable formal requirements, was duly notified to the Respondent and has been submitted to a properly constituted Panel in accordance with the UDRP, the Rules and the Supplemental Rules. 4. Factual Background
The Complainant is responsible for the overall architecture, rules and procedures of the “Cartes Bancaires CB” credit card system, in which a number of leading banks and many cardholders and merchants participate. The Complainant defines the technical standards and specifications and data exchange tools, and guarantees compliance with the requirements and rules of the system by manufacturers of equipment and participating banks and merchants. The Complainant also manages the network which switches payment and cash withdrawal authorizations between members.
The Complainant registered its company name “Groupement des Cartes Bancaires CB” in 1985 and the trademark “Cartes Bancaires Actualités” in France on March 13, 1989. The Complainant has also registered various domain names containing “cartesbancaires” as the second level domain.
The Domain Name was registered in 1999. From 2001 to 2007 the Domain Name pointed to a web page indicating that it was for sale. The Domain Name is currently directed to a Yahoo web page. 5. Parties' Contentions A. Complainant
The Complainant contends that the Domain Name is confusingly similar to the marks “Groupement des Cartes Bancaires CB”, “Cartes Bancaires Actualités” and “Cartes Bancaires” in which it has rights by registration as a company name or mark and/or by use.
The Complainant submits that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the Domain Name or the name “Cartes Bancaires” and notes that it has not licensed or authorized the Respondent to use these names.
The Complainant alleges that the Domain Name was registered and is being used in bad faith, drawing attention in particular to the fact that it was offered for sale between 2001 and 2007.
The Complainant requests a decision that the Domain Name be transferred to it. B. Respondent
As stated above, the Respondent did not reply to the Complainant's contentions. 6. Discussion and Findings
In accordance with paragraph 4(a) of the Policy, in order to succeed in this proceeding, the Complainant must prove (i) that the Domain Name is identical or confusingly similar to a mark in which it has rights; (ii) that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the Domain Name; and (iii) that the Domain Name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.
It is necessary to consider these requirements in turn. A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel finds on the undisputed evidence that the Complainant has rights in the marks “Groupement des Cartes Bancaires CB”, “Cartes Bancaires Actualités” and “Cartes Bancaires” by virtue of registration and/or use.
The Panel considers that the Domain Name is effectively identical to the mark “Cartes Bancaires” and confusingly similar to the marks “Groupement des Cartes Bancaires CB” and “Cartes Bancaires Actualités”.
The first requirement of the UDRP is satisfied. B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
The Panel finds from the record that the Respondent has not used or made preparations to use the Domain Name or a corresponding name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services before notice of this dispute, that the Respondent is not commonly known by the Domain Name, and that he is not making legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the Domain Name.
There does not appear to be any other basis on the record on which the Respondent could claim any right or legitimate interest in respect of the Domain Name. In the circumstances, the Panel finds that the Respondent does not have any rights or legitimate interests in respect of the Domain Name. The second requirement of the UDRP is satisfied. C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith
The Panel considers that the nature of the Domain Name (consisting solely of the mark “Cartes Bancaires” mark and the .com top level domain suffix) and its offer for sale for several years from the earliest date on which records are available raise the inference that it was registered primarily for the purpose of sale to the Complainant at a profit. This inference stands unrebutted by any other evidence.
The Panel therefore finds that the Domain Name was registered primarily for the purpose of sale to the Complainant for valuable consideration in excess of the Respondent's out-of-pocket costs directly related to the domain name.
In accordance with paragraph 4(b)(i) of the UDRP these circumstances constitute evidence that the Domain Name was registered and is being used in bad faith. There is no material on the record which displaces this presumption.
The Panel therefore finds that the Domain Name was registered and is being used in bad faith. The third requirement of the UDRP is satisfied. 7. Decision
For all the foregoing reasons, in accordance with paragraphs 4(i) of the Policy and 15 of the Rules, the Panel orders that the domain name, , be transferred to the Complainant.
Jonathan Turner
Sole Panelist
Dated: July 16, 2010
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy