Metso Corporation v Ratley [2005] DRS 00977 (18 August 2003)

Metso Corporation v Ratley [2005] DRS 00977 (18 August 2003)

The complainant established rights in the name METSO, but failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the respondent registered or used the domain name abusively. The respondent demonstrated prior and ongoing use of 'Metso' as an artist's name, and there was insufficient evidence of intent to target, sell to, block, or disrupt the complainant. Mere risk or limited instances of confusion did not amount to abusive registration.

Citation
[2005] DRS 00977
Parties
Complainant: Metso Corporation; Respondent: Adrian Ratley
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
18 August 2003
Procedural Posture
Domain Name Dispute / Expert Determination Under Nominet UK Dispute Resolution Service
Outcome
Complaint refused
Legal Topics
Domain Names, Trade Marks, Passing Off, Abusive Registration
Intellectual Property Information Technology Domain Names Trade Marks Passing Off Abusive Registration

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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Metso Corporation

Complainant

Adrian Ratley

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Domain Name Dispute / Expert Determination Under Nominet UK Dispute Resolution Service

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the complainant has rights in a name or mark identical or similar to the 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 name METSO, but failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the respondent registered or used the domain name abusively. The respondent demonstrated prior and ongoing use of 'Metso' as an artist's name, and there was insufficient evidence of intent to target, sell to, block, or disrupt the complainant. Mere risk or limited instances of confusion did not amount to abusive registration.

Court Disposition

Complaint refused

Orders

  • No transfer or cancellation of the domain name metso.co.uk; the domain remains with the respondent.