Complainant is OLX B.V. of Hoofddorp, the Netherlands, represented by CSC Digital Brand Services AB, Sweden.
Respondent is Iqbal / Milano Enterprises of Qatar. 2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with Qatar Electronic Publishing & Trading (the "Registrar"). 3. Procedural History
The Complaint was filed with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (the "Center") on September 7, 2015. On September 7, 2015, the Center transmitted by email to the Registrar a request for registrar verification in connection with the disputed domain name. On September 9, 2015, the Registrar transmitted by email to the Center its verification response disclosing registrant and contact information for the disputed domain name.
The Center verified that the Complaint satisfied the formal requirements of the Qatar Domains Registry Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Policy"), the Rules for Qatar Domains Registry Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Rules"), and the WIPO Supplemental Rules for Qatar Domains Registry Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Supplemental Rules").
In accordance with the Rules, paragraphs 2(a) and 4(a), the Center formally notified Respondent of the Complaint, and the proceedings commenced on September 17, 2015. In accordance with the Rules, paragraph 5(a), the due date for Response was October 7, 2015. Respondent did not submit any formal response. Accordingly, the Center notified Respondent's default on October 9, 2015.
The Center appointed Nasser A. Khasawneh as sole panelist in this matter on October 20, 2015. 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.
On October 27, 2015, the Center received a communication from the Registrar reporting that it had been called by someone "on behalf of the person who booked this domain . . . to confirm they can transfer the domain if required." In response to a request by the Center for confirmation of that communication, on November 7, 2015, Respondent emailed the Center directly, stating "im ready to transfer Domain please proceed". 4. Factual Background
Complainant is the owner of many registrations worldwide for its OLX mark, including, for example European Community Trademark No. 010881456 in classes 35 and 38, registered September 25, 2012.
The disputed domain name was registered on December 25, 2014. 5. Parties' Contentions A. Complainant
Summarizing its legal contentions, Complainant alleges that (1) the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant's trademark, (2) Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name, and (3) the disputed domain name was registered or is being used in bad faith, all in violation of the Policy. On the above grounds, Complainant requests transfer of the disputed domain name.
In light of the final disposition of this proceeding, as explained below, it is unnecessary to recount Complainant's further allegations. B. Respondent
As noted above, Respondent emailed Complainant and the Center on November 7, 2015, expressing his unilateral and unambiguous willingness to transfer the disputed domain name. 6. Discussion and Findings A. Substantive Rules of Decision
The Rules require the Panel to decide the Complaint on the basis of the statements and documents submitted and in accordance with the Policy, the Rules, and any rules and principles of law that it deems applicable. Rules, paragraph 15(a).
Paragraph 10(a) of the Rules gives panels the discretion to conduct proceedings in such manner as they deem appropriate under the Policy and the Rules. Under paragraph 10(c), the Panel must "ensure that the proceeding takes place with due expedition." B. Respondent's Consent to Transfer
The Panel finds that Respondent has unequivocally consented to transfer of the disputed domain name. C. Ordering Transfer without Consideration of all Elements under the Rules, Paragraph 4(a)
The Panel concludes that Respondent's consent provides a basis for an immediate order for transfer.
Where the complainant has sought transfer of a disputed domain name under the UDRP, and the respondent consents to transfer, then pursuant to paragraph 10 of the Rules, the Panel may order transfer without determining whether Complainant has established its entitlement to transfer under paragraph 4(a) of the Rules. E.g., The Cartoon Network LP, LLLP v. Mike Morgan,WIPO Case No. D2005-1132 (where complainant sought transfer of the disputed domain name, and respondent consented to transfer, paragraph 10 of the Rules permitted the panel to proceed immediately to order the transfer of the domain name without determination of elements of paragraph 4(a)), citing Williams-Sonoma, Inc. v. EZ-Port,WIPO Case No. D2000-0207. See WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP Questions, Second Edition ("WIPO Overview 2.0") paragraph 4.13. Panelists have generally recognized that prior UDRP decisions and the WIPO Overview can be of assistance in proceedings involving certain ccTLDs such as ".qa" given the similarities between the Policies. See Liposonix, Inc. v. Robert Fam, Cosmedix Pty Ltd.,WIPO Case No. DAU2015-0019. The Panel applies this reasoning to the current proceeding.
An order of transfer is clearly the most expeditious course (see Williams-Sonoma, Inc. v. EZ-Port, supra). 7. Decision
For the foregoing reasons, in accordance with paragraphs 5(i) of the Policy and 15 of the Rules, the Panel orders that the disputed domain name be transferred to Complainant.
Nasser A. Khasawneh
Sole Panelist
Date: November 15, 2015
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy