Orange Brand Services Limited v David Schennikov (Summary Decision _Transfer) [2013] DRS 12246 (27 February 2013)

Orange Brand Services Limited v David Schennikov (Summary Decision _Transfer) [2013] DRS 12246 (27 February 2013)

The complainant established all three elements required under the Nominet DRS Policy, and the domain name was ordered to be transferred.

Citation
[2013] DRS 12246
Parties
Complainant: Orange Brand Services Limited; Respondent: David Schennikov
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
27 February 2013
Procedural Posture
Domain Name Dispute / Summary Decision
Outcome
domain name transfer ordered
Legal Topics
Domain Name Transfer, Trademark Infringement
Intellectual Property Internet Law Domain Name Transfer Trademark Infringement

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 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Orange Brand Services Limited

Complainant

David Schennikov

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Domain Name Dispute / Summary Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the domain name registered by the respondent is identical or similar to a trademark in which the complainant has rights
  2. 2 Whether the respondent has rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name
  3. 3 Whether the domain name was registered or is being used in bad faith

Ratio Decidendi

The complainant established all three elements required under the Nominet DRS Policy, and the domain name was ordered to be transferred.

Court Disposition

domain name transfer ordered

Orders

  • The domain name is to be transferred to the complainant.