Electrolux AB v Hartnoll (Summary Decision _No Action) [2013] DRS 12195 (03 January 2013)

Electrolux AB v Hartnoll (Summary Decision _No Action) [2013] DRS 12195 (03 January 2013)

The complainant failed to establish that the respondent's registration was abusive or in bad faith under the Nominet DRS Policy.

Citation
[2013] DRS 12195
Parties
Complainant: Electrolux AB; Respondent: Hartnoll
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
03 January 2013
Procedural Posture
Domain Name Dispute / Summary Decision
Outcome
Complaint dismissed
Legal Topics
Domain Name Dispute, Trade Mark Infringement
Intellectual Property Internet Law Domain Name Dispute Trade Mark 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

Electrolux AB

Complainant

Hartnoll

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Domain Name Dispute / Summary Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the domain name registration by the respondent is abusive or in bad faith
  2. 2 Whether the complainant has rights in the name or mark

Ratio Decidendi

The complainant failed to establish that the respondent's registration was abusive or in bad faith under the Nominet DRS Policy.

Court Disposition

Complaint dismissed

Orders

  • No action to be taken regarding the domain name