The Petitioner is Skyscanner Limited, United Kingdom, represented by Keltie LLP, United Kingdom. 2. Domain Holder
The Domain Holder is J.S., Direct Navigation Data Inc., Panama. 3. Domain Name and Procedural History
This Alternative Dispute Resolution proceeding relates to the domain name This Petition was filed under the Terms and Conditions of registration (the “.se Policy”) and the Instructions governing Alternative Dispute Resolution proceeding for domain names in the top-level domain .se (the “.se Rules”). The WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (the Center) verified that the Petition satisfied the formal requirements of the .se Policy and the .se Rules. In accordance with Section 13 of the .se Rules the Center formally notified the Domain Holder of the Petition on April 21, 2020. The Domain Holder did not submit any response and, accordingly, the Center notified the Domain Holder’s default on May 22, 2020. The Center appointed Henry Olsson as the sole Arbitrator in this matter on June 2, 2020. The Arbitrator has submitted the Statement of Acceptance and Declaration of Impartiality and Independence, as required by the Center to ensure compliance with Section 1 of the .se Rules. 4. Factual Background The Petitioner has indicated that it is the Holder of an International Trade Mark Registration under the number 900393 for the trademark SKYSCANNER, registered on March 3, 2006, and in respect of which the European Union has been designated. Furthermore, the Petitioner is the Holder of an International Trade Mark Registration under the number 1030086 for the trademark SKYSCANNER. According to a Statement of Grant of Protection, issued by the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market on January 17, 2011, that trademark was accepted for protection in the European Community. The Domain Name was registered on September 19, 2011, and redirects to the Petitioner’s website. 5. Claim The Petitioner claims that the Domain Name shall be transferred to the Petitioner. The Domain Holder has not responded to the Claim. 6. Parties’ Contentions A. Petitioner The Petitioner has submitted that the Domain Name is identical or similar to a name which is legally recognized in Sweden and to which the Petitioner can prove its rights, that the Domain Name has been registered or used in bad faith and that the Domain Holder has no rights or justified interest in the Domain Name. The Petitioner has submitted a comprehensive and detailed documentation in support of its Contentions, and has requested to have the dispute decided as an Accelerated Proceeding if the Domain Holder does not respond to the Petition. B. Domain Holder As mentioned above, the Domain Holder has not submitted any response to the Petitioner’s Claim. 7. Discussion and Findings Pursuant to its consideration of the circumstances in the case and the documentation submitted by the Petitioner in support of its Claim and which have been left undisputed by the Domain Holder, the Arbitrator draws the following Conclusions. A. The Domain Name is similar to a trademark which is legally recognized in Sweden and to which the Petitioner can prove its rights B. The Domain Name has been registered and used in bad faith C. The Domain Holder has no rights or justified interest in the Domain Name. 8. Decision The Arbitrator directs that the Domain Name Henry Olsson
Date: June 4, 2020
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy