Woodbills Ltd v Granite Internet [2004] DRS 1886 (28 August 2004)

Woodbills Ltd v Granite Internet [2004] DRS 1886 (28 August 2004)

The complainant failed to discharge the burden of proof required by the DRS Policy, as he did not identify or substantiate any rights in a name or mark nor demonstrate that the registration was abusive. The complaint was vague, unsupported by evidence, and did not address the requirements of the Policy.

Citation
[2004] DRS 1886
Parties
Complainant: Woodbills Ltd.; Respondent: Granite Internet Ltd. (in Liquidation)
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
28 August 2004
Procedural Posture
Domain Name Dispute / Expert Determination
Outcome
Complaint dismissed
Legal Topics
Domain Name Disputes, Abusive Registration, Burden of Proof
Intellectual Property Internet Law Domain Name Disputes Abusive Registration Burden of Proof

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Woodbills Ltd.

Complainant

Granite Internet Ltd. (in Liquidation)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Domain Name Dispute / Expert Determination

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 failed to discharge the burden of proof required by the DRS Policy, as he did not identify or substantiate any rights in a name or mark nor demonstrate that the registration was abusive. The complaint was vague, unsupported by evidence, and did not address the requirements of the Policy.

Court Disposition

Complaint dismissed

Orders

  • No action to be taken on the domain name registration