About Intellectual Property IP Training IP Outreach IP for… IP and... IP in... Patent & Technology Information Trademark Information Industrial Design Information Geographical Indication Information Plant Variety Information (UPOV) IP Laws, Treaties & Judgements IP Resources IP Reports Patent Protection Trademark Protection Industrial Design Protection Geographical Indication Protection Plant Variety Protection (UPOV) IP Dispute Resolution IP Office Business Solutions Paying for IP Services Negotiation & Decision-Making Development Cooperation Innovation Support Public-Private Partnerships The Organization Working with WIPO Accountability Patents Trademarks Industrial Designs Geographical Indications Copyright Trade Secrets WIPO Academy Workshops & Seminars World IP Day WIPO Magazine Raising Awareness Case Studies & Success Stories IP News WIPO Awards Business Universities Indigenous Peoples Judiciaries Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Cultural Expressions Economics Gender Equality Global Health Climate Change Competition Policy Sustainable Development Goals Enforcement Frontier Technologies Mobile Applications Sports Tourism PATENTSCOPE Patent Analytics International Patent Classification ARDI – Research for Innovation ASPI – Specialized Patent Information Global Brand Database Madrid Monitor Article 6ter Express Database Nice Classification Vienna Classification Global Design Database International Designs Bulletin Hague Express Database Locarno Classification Lisbon Express Database Global Brand Database for GIs PLUTO Plant Variety Database GENIE Database WIPO-Administered Treaties WIPO Lex - IP Laws, Treaties & Judgments WIPO Standards IP Statistics WIPO Pearl (Terminology) WIPO Publications Country IP Profiles WIPO Knowledge Center WIPO Technology Trends Global Innovation Index World Intellectual Property Report PCT – The International Patent System ePCT Budapest – The International Microorganism Deposit System Madrid – The International Trademark System eMadrid Article 6ter (armorial bearings, flags, state emblems) Hague – The International Design System eHague Lisbon – The International System of Appellations of Origin and Geographical Indications eLisbon UPOV PRISMA Mediation Arbitration Expert Determination Domain Name Disputes Centralized Access to Search and Examination (CASE) Digital Access Service (DAS) WIPO Pay Current Account at WIPO WIPO Assemblies Standing Committees Calendar of Meetings WIPO Official Documents Development Agenda Technical Assistance IP Training Institutions COVID-19 Support National IP Strategies Policy & Legislative Advice Cooperation Hub Technology and Innovation Support Centers (TISC) Technology Transfer Inventor Assistance Program WIPO GREEN WIPO's Pat-INFORMED Accessible Books Consortium WIPO for Creators WIPO ALERT Member States Observers Director General Activities by Unit External Offices Job Vacancies Procurement Results & Budget Financial Reporting Oversight

WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center

ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION

Association des Centres Distributeurs E. Leclerc - ACD Lec v. Withheld for Privacy Purposes, Privacy service provided by Withheld for Privacy ehf / Reda El Kasraoui

Case No. D2021-1389

1. The Parties

The Complainant is Association des Centres Distributeurs E. Leclerc - ACD Lec, France, represented by Inlex IP Expertise, France.

The Respondent is Withheld for Privacy Purposes, Privacy service provided by Withheld for Privacy ehf, Iceland / Reda El Kasraoui, Morocco.

2. The Domain Name and Registrar

The disputed domain name <eleclerc.space> (“the Domain Name”) is registered with NameCheap, Inc. (the “Registrar”).

3. Procedural History

The Complaint was filed with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (the “Center”) on May 5, 2021. On May 5, 2021, the Center transmitted by email to the Registrar a request for registrar verification in connection with the Domain Name. On May 5, 2021, the Registrar transmitted by email to the Center its verification response disclosing registrant and contact information for the Domain Name which differed from the named Respondent and contact information in the Complaint. The Center sent an email communication to the Complainant on May 10, 2021 providing the registrant and contact information disclosed by the Registrar, and inviting the Complainant to submit an amendment to the Complaint. The Complainant filed an amended Complaint on May 14, 2021.

The Center verified that the Complaint, together with the amended 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 the Respondent of the Complaint, and the proceedings commenced on May 18, 2021. In accordance with the Rules, paragraph 5, the due date for Response was June 7, 2021. The Respondent did not submit any response. Accordingly, the Center notified the Respondent’s default on June 8, 2021.

The Center appointed Dawn Osborne as the sole panelist in this matter on June 17, 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 Background

The Complainant is the owner of the mark E LECLERC registered, inter alia, as an European Union (“EU”) trade mark Registration No. 2700664 for retail services since January 31, 2005. The Complainant is one of the most renowned chain of supermarkets and hypermarkets stores in France.

The Domain Name registered on January 1, 2021, does not resolve to an active web site but has been set up for email, as evidenced by active MX records.

5. Parties’ Contentions

A. Complainant

The Complainant is the owner of the mark E LECLERC registered, inter alia, as an EU trade mark Registration No 2700664 for retail services since 2005. It has been used in relation to retail supermarkets for over 70 years and the mark is well known.

The Domain Name registered on January 1, 2021, is identical to the Complainant’s mark adding only the generic Top-Level Domain (“gTLD”) “.space”.

The Respondent does not have any rights or legitimate interests in the Domain Name, is not commonly known by it, and is not authorised by the Complainant.

The Domain Name does not resolve to an active web site but has been set up for email which could be used for phishing. Internet users may associate the Domain Name with the Complainant and think that the site is a site of the Complainant which is not working or is hacked which is harmful to the Complainant’s goodwill. The Domain Name has been registered and used to take advantage of the Complainant’s well-known mark and was registered using a privacy service which is also an indication of bad faith.

B. Respondent

The Respondent did not reply to the Complainant’s contentions.

6. Discussion and Findings

A. Identical or Confusingly Similar

The Domain Name consists of the Complainant’s E LECLERC mark (which is registered, inter alia, as an EU trade mark for retail services services since 2005) and the gTLD “.space”. The mark is well known and distinctive for retail services.

The gTLD “.space” does not prevent a finding of confusing similarity between the Domain Name and the Complainant’s mark, which is the distinctive component of the Domain Name. A gTLD is a necessary part of a domain name and is typically disregarded for purposes of the first element analysis.

Accordingly, the Panel holds that the Domain Name is identical for the purpose of the Policy to a mark in which the Complainant has rights.

B. Rights or Legitimate Interests

The Complainant has not authorised the Respondent to use its E LECLERC mark. The Respondent has not answered this Complaint and there is no evidence or reason to suggest the Respondent is, in fact, commonly known by the Domain Name.

There has been no use of the Domain Name and so no bona fide offering of goods or services or legitimate noncommercial or fair use.

The Domain Name consists of the Complainant’s E LECLERC mark in its entirety. UDRP panels have found that domain names identical for the purposes of the Policy to a complainant’s trademark carry a high risk of implied affiliation. That being said, the use of the Domain Name cannot constitute fair use, seeing as it effectively impersonates or suggests sponsorship or endorsement by the Complainant.

As such, the Panel finds that the Respondent does not have rights or a legitimate interest in the Domain Name.

C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith

The Respondent has not answered this Complaint or explained why it should be entitled to register and hold a domain name containing the Complainant’s E LECLERC trade mark which is well known and distinctive for retail services.

The Domain Name has not been used. Passive holding of a Domain Name containing a trade mark which is well known and distinctive in these circumstances does not prevent and supports a finding of bad faith under the Policy.

As such, the Panel holds that the Complainant has made out its case that the Domain Name was registered and used in bad faith.

7. Decision

For the foregoing reasons, in accordance with paragraphs 4(i) of the Policy and 15 of the Rules, the Panel orders that the Domain Name, <eleclerc.space> be transferred to the Complainant.

Dawn Osborne
Sole Panelist
Date: June 18, 2021

https://www3.wipo.int/contact/en/area.jsp?area=arbitration https://www.wipo.int/pressroom/en/ https://www.wipo.int/tools/en/disclaim.html https://www.wipo.int/en/web/privacy-policy/ https://www.wipo.int/en/web/accessibility/ https://www.wipo.int/tools/en/sitemap.html https://www3.wipo.int/newsletters/en/ https://www.wipo.int/podcasts/en/ https://www.wipo.int/news/en/