Complainant is WestJet Airlines Ltd., Alberta, Canada, represented by Gowling WLG (Canada) LLP, Canada.
Respondent is Withheld for Privacy Purposes, Privacy service provided by Withheld for Privacy ehf, Iceland / Charles Manley, United States of America (“USA”).
2. The Domain Name and RegistrarThe disputed domain name
The Complaint was filed with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (the “Center”) on July 15, 2021. On July 16, 2021, the Center transmitted by email to the Registrar a request for registrar verification in connection with the Domain Name. On July 16, 2021, the Registrar transmitted by email to the Center its verification response disclosing registrant and contact information for the Domain Name which differed from named Respondent and contact information in the Complaint. The Center sent an email communication to Complainant on July 19, 2021 providing the registrant and contact information disclosed by the Registrar, and inviting Complainant to submit an amendment to the Complaint. Complainant filed an amendment to the Complaint on July 27, 2021.
The Center verified that the Complaint together with the amendment to the Complaint satisfied the formal requirements of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy” or “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 the Rules, paragraphs 2 and 4, the Center formally notified Respondent of the Complaint, and the proceedings commenced on August 24, 2021. In accordance with the Rules, paragraph 5, the due date for Response was September 13, 2021. Respondent did not submit any response. Accordingly, the Center notified Respondent’s default on September 14, 2021.
The Center appointed Clive L. Elliott Q.C., as the sole panelist in this matter on October 7, 2021. The Panel finds that it was properly constituted. The Panel has submitted the Statement of Acceptance and Declaration of Impartiality and Independence, as required by the Center to ensure compliance with the Rules, paragraph 7.
4. Factual BackgroundComplainant was founded in 1996. It is a leading international airline offering scheduled services to more than 100 destinations in North America, Central America, the Caribbean and Europe and to more than 175 destinations in over 20 countries through its airline partnerships. It has its head office in Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Complainant is the owner of various trade mark registrations worldwide comprised of, or containing, WESTJET (“Complainant’s Mark”), including:
Trade Mark
Country/ Territory
Registration No
Registration Date
WESTJET
Canada
TMA480424
August 14, 1997
Canada
TMA656341
January 11, 2006
WESTJET VACATIONS
Canada
TMA688699
May 31, 2007
VACANCES WESTJET
Canada
TMA728702
November 18, 2008
WESTJET CREDIT CARD PROGRAM
Canada
TMA777367
September 17, 2010
United States of America
3559405
January 13, 2009
United States of America
4460962
January 7, 2014
WESTJET
European Union
12810289
November 7, 2014
WESTJET CONNECT
European Union
14424154
February 1, 2016
Complainant’s website has operated since 1995 and resolves to the domain name
According to the publicly available WhoIs the Domain Name was registered on June 5, 2021. As at the date of the Complaint the Domain Name resolved to a website whereby Respondent is impersonating Complaint identifying itself as “WestJet Customer Care” in a copyright notice at the bottom of the website, and promoting its services, as “WestJet Customer Service”.
5. Parties’ Contentions A. ComplainantComplainant states that the Domain Name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s Mark as it incorporates Complainant’s Mark in its entirety, with the addition of the term “customer”. Further, Complainant contends that the addition of this term is likely to result in consumers being confused into believing that the Domain Name is connected to Complainant.
Complainant asserts that Respondent is impersonating Complainant while engaging in misappropriation of its intellectual property, and there is no evidence to suggest that Respondent has ever used the Domain Name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods and services. Complainant goes on to assert that Respondent has never been in a relationship with Complainant, and Respondent is not licensed or otherwise authorized to register or use Complainant’s Marks.
Complainant submits that Respondent has registered the Domain Name in bad faith for the purpose of disrupting the business of Complainant by piggybacking on the goodwill associated with Complainant’s Marks in an attempt to exploit for commercial gain Internet traffic destined for Complainant.
B. RespondentRespondent did not reply to Complainant’s contentions.
6. Discussion and Findings A. Identical or Confusingly SimilarComplainant has established it has rights in Complainant’s Marks. Complainant has operated an airline business since 1996. Based in Alberta Canada, it has provided scheduled services to more than 100 destinations in North America, Central America, the Caribbean and Europe and to more than 175 destinations in over 20 countries, through its airline partnerships. Complainant has secured trade mark rights in a number of jurisdictions around the world including in its home country Canada.
Complainant submits that the Domain Name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s Marks in that it incorporates Complainant Marks in their entirety i.e. the word component “WESTJET”, with the addition of the term “customer”.
The Domain Name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s Marks. It contains, in addition to a leading feature of Complainant’s Marks namely the words “West” and “Jet” combined in the same manner as Complainant does, along with the word “customer”.
The addition of the term “customer” certainly does not prevent a finding of confusing similarity. See WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP Questions, Third Edition (“WIPO Overview 3.0”), section 1.8.
The Domain Name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s Marks, thereby making out the first ground under the Policy.
B. Rights or Legitimate InterestsComplainant contends that the Domain Name resolves to a website which impersonates Complainant, identifying itself, and promoting its services, as “WestJet Customer Care”, and “WestJet Customer Service”. Absent any refutation of these allegations, it appears that Respondent has not only chosen a very similar Domain Name but it is seeking to impersonate Complainant. This is likely to give the false impression to existing and potential customers of Complainant that they are accessing a genuine site, associated with Complainant, when that is not the case. The Panel concludes Respondent is benefiting from wrongly associating itself with Complainant and its airline services.
Under the circumstances, the Panel concludes that the Domain Name was not registered and has not been used for any legitimate noncommercial or fair purpose.
Accordingly, the second ground under the Policy is made out.
C. Registered and Used in Bad FaithComplainant submits that Respondent registered the Domain Name in bad faith in order to disrupt the business of Complainant. Further, it submits that Respondent is piggybacking on the goodwill associated with Complainant’s Marks in an attempt to exploit for commercial gain Internet traffic destined for Complainant. Under the circumstances and absent any explanation for Respondent’s actions, both those submissions are well-founded.
Complainant has established that the Domain Name was registered and used for the purpose of taking advantage of Complainant’s reputation and Complainant’s Marks to misleadingly attract Internet users to Respondent’s website. This amounts to bad faith conduct under the Policy.
Complainant has therefore clearly established the third ground under the Policy.
7. DecisionFor the foregoing reasons, in accordance with paragraphs 4(i) of the Policy and 15 of the Rules, the Panel orders that the Domain Name
Clive L. Elliott
Sole Panelist
Date: October 22, 2021