Swarovski Aktiengesellschaft v Faye Howarth (Summary Decision _Transfer) [2014] DRS 13794 (05 March 2014)

Swarovski Aktiengesellschaft v Faye Howarth (Summary Decision _Transfer) [2014] DRS 13794 (05 March 2014)

The Panel found that the domain name is identical or confusingly similar to the Complainant's trademark, the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests, and the domain name was registered in bad faith. Transfer of the domain name to the Complainant was ordered.

Citation
[2014] DRS 13794
Parties
Complainant: Swarovski Aktiengesellschaft; Respondent: Faye Howarth
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
05 March 2014
Procedural Posture
Domain Name Dispute / Summary Decision
Outcome
Domain name transferred to Complainant
Legal Topics
Domain Name Transfer, Trademark Infringement
Intellectual Property Domain Name 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 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Swarovski Aktiengesellschaft

Complainant

Faye Howarth

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 Panel found that the domain name is identical or confusingly similar to the Complainant's trademark, the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests, and the domain name was registered in bad faith. Transfer of the domain name to the Complainant was ordered.

Court Disposition

Domain name transferred to Complainant

Orders

  • Transfer of the disputed domain name to Swarovski Aktiengesellschaft