Focus Eye Clinic v Craig Gillham (Summary Decision _Transfer) [2017] DRS 19317 (24 October 2017)

Focus Eye Clinic v Craig Gillham (Summary Decision _Transfer) [2017] DRS 19317 (24 October 2017)

The panel found that the complainant had rights in the name and that the respondent's registration was abusive, warranting transfer.

Citation
[2017] DRS 19317
Parties
Complainant: Focus Eye Clinic; Respondent: Craig Gillham
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
24 October 2017
Procedural Posture
Domain Name Dispute / Summary Decision
Outcome
Domain name transferred to complainant
Legal Topics
Domain Name Disputes, Passing Off
Intellectual Property Internet Law Domain Name Disputes Passing Off

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Focus Eye Clinic

Complainant

Craig Gillham

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Domain Name Dispute / Summary Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the domain name should be transferred to the complainant

Ratio Decidendi

The panel found that the complainant had rights in the name and that the respondent's registration was abusive, warranting transfer.

Court Disposition

Domain name transferred to complainant

Orders

  • Transfer of the disputed domain name to Focus Eye Clinic