The Complainant is KIKO S.p.A., of Italy, represented by Barzanò & Zanardo Milano SpA, Italy.
The Respondent is Abdulrahman Alnuaimi of Ajman, United Arab Emirates ("UAE"). 2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name (the "Domain Name") is registered with AE Domain Administration (.aeDA). 3. Procedural History
The Complaint was filed with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (the "Center") on December 13, 2017. On the same day, the Center transmitted by email to AE Domain Administration (.aeDA) a request for registrar verification in connection with the Domain Name. On December 14, 2017, AE Domain Administration (.aeDA) transmitted by email to the Center its verification response confirming that the Respondent is listed as the registrant and providing the contact details.
The Center verified that the Complaint satisfied the formal requirements of the UAE Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy – UAE DRP approved by .aeDA (the "Policy"), the Rules for UAE Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy – UAE DRP (the "Rules"), and the Supplemental Rules for UAE Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy – UAE DRP (the "Supplemental Rules").
In accordance with the Rules, paragraphs 2(a) and 4(a), the Center formally notified the Respondent of the Complaint, and the proceedings commenced on December 19, 2017. In accordance with the Rules, paragraph 5(a), the due date for Response was January 8, 2018. The Respondent did not submit any Response. Accordingly, the Center notified the Respondent's default on January 9, 2018.
The Center appointed Ian Lowe as panelist in this matter on January 12, 2018. 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 Background
The Complainant is an Italian company founded in 1997 that has been active in the cosmetics field for more than 20 years. It has over 600 points of sale in eight countries in Europe, and through its online service delivery it has a presence in 34 countries around the world including the UAE and the United States of America.
The Complainant is the registered proprietor of many trademarks around the world including UAE trademark number 24068 registered on March 7, 2000 and European Union trademark number 1141126 registered on May 15, 2003, both in respect of the word mark KIKO. It operates an active website at "".
The Domain Name was registered by the Respondent on March 30, 2017 and currently resolves to a parking page. So far as the Complainant is aware, the Domain Name has never resolved to an active website, but only to a parking page. The Respondent did not reply to a cease and desist letter sent on behalf of the Complainant. 5. Parties' Contentions A. Complainant
The Complainant contends that the Domain Name is identical to its KIKO trademarks (the "Mark"), that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the Domain Name, and that the Respondent registered and/or is using the Domain Name in bad faith within the meaning of paragraph 4(b)(iv) of the Policy. B. Respondent
The Respondent did not reply to the Complainant's contentions. 6. Discussion and Findings
For this Complaint to succeed in relation to the Domain Name the Complainant must prove that:
(i) the Domain Name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights; and
(ii) the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the Domain Name; and
(iii) the Domain Name has been registered or is being used in bad faith. A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant has uncontested rights in the Mark, both by virtue of its many trademark registrations around the world and as a result of the goodwill and reputation acquired through its widespread use of the mark over some 20 years. Ignoring the country code Top-Level Domain ("ccTLD") ".ae", the Domain Name is identical to the Mark. Accordingly, the Panel finds that the Domain Name is identical to a trademark in which the Complainant has rights. B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
The Complainant has made out a strong prima facie case that the Respondent could have no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the Domain Name. The Respondent has not made any active use of the Domain Name, and failed to respond to the cease and desist letter sent on behalf of the Complainant. The Respondent has chosen not to respond to the Complaint to explain its registration of the Domain Name or to take any other steps to counter the prima facie case established by the Complainant. In the circumstances, the Panel finds on balance that the Respondent does not have any rights or legitimate interests in respect of the Domain Name. C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith
The Complainant asserts that in light of its sales of KIKO products in the UAE, its KIKO mark is likely to be known in the UAE. Further, it points out that KIKO is a made-up word with no natural meaning and in the circumstances it is most likely that the Respondent had the Complainant and its rights in the Mark in mind when it registered the Domain Name. The Complainant's rights in the Mark predate the registration of the Domain Name by many years and the Panel accepts that the obvious inference is that the Respondent registered the Domain Name for commercial gain with a view to taking unfair advantage of the Complainant's rights in the Mark, by confusing Internet users into believing that the Domain Name was being operated by or authorized by the Complainant for legitimate purposes related to the Complainant's activities, or alternatively with a view to selling the Domain Name Registration to the Complainant or to a competitor of the Complainant, for valuable consideration in excess of its documented out-of-pocket costs directly related to the Domain Name.
Accordingly, the Panel finds that the Domain Name has been registered in bad faith. The Respondent has apparently made no use of the Domain Name but, in light of the bad faith provisions of the Policy, it is not necessary to consider whether the Domain Name is being used in bad faith. 7. Decision
For the foregoing reasons, in accordance with paragraphs 6(i) of the Policy and 15 of the Rules, the Panel orders that the Domain Name be transferred to the Complainant.
Ian Lowe
Panelist
Date: January 18, 2018
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy