Scania CV AB (publ) v Mayat [2007] DRS 4196 (26 February 2006)

Scania CV AB (publ) v Mayat [2007] DRS 4196 (26 February 2006)

The complainant established rights in the SCANIA mark and the domain name is similar. The respondent registered the domain name with knowledge of the complainant's mark and intended to extract value from the complainant, as evidenced by communications and the offer to direct the domain for a fee exceeding out-of-pocket costs. This constitutes abusive registration under the DRS Policy.

Citation
[2007] DRS 4196
Parties
Complainant: Scania CV AB (publ); Respondent: Abdul Mayat
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
26 February 2006
Procedural Posture
Domain Name Dispute / Expert Decision After Failed Mediation
Outcome
Complaint upheld
Legal Topics
Trade Marks, Abusive Registration, Domain Name Transfer
Intellectual Property Domain Name Law Trade Marks Abusive Registration Domain Name Transfer

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Scania CV AB (publ)

Complainant

Abdul Mayat

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Domain Name Dispute / Expert Decision After Failed Mediation

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the complainant has rights in a name or mark identical or similar to the disputed domain name
  2. 2 Whether the domain name in the hands of the respondent is an abusive registration

Ratio Decidendi

The complainant established rights in the SCANIA mark and the domain name is similar. The respondent registered the domain name with knowledge of the complainant's mark and intended to extract value from the complainant, as evidenced by communications and the offer to direct the domain for a fee exceeding out-of-pocket costs. This constitutes abusive registration under the DRS Policy.

Court Disposition

Complaint upheld

Orders

  • The disputed domain name should be transferred to the complainant.