ARCELORMITTAL v Jaymin Patel (Summary Decision _Transfer) [2011] DRS 9596 (12 April 2011)

ARCELORMITTAL v Jaymin Patel (Summary Decision _Transfer) [2011] DRS 9596 (12 April 2011)

The complainant established rights in the name and mark ARCELORMITTAL, the domain name is identical or similar, and the respondent's registration was abusive. Transfer of the domain name was ordered.

Citation
[2011] DRS 9596
Parties
Complainant: ARCELORMITTAL; Respondent: Jaymin Patel
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
12 April 2011
Procedural Posture
Domain Name Dispute / Summary Decision
Outcome
Transfer ordered
Legal Topics
Domain Name Dispute, Trade Mark Infringement
Intellectual Property 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

ARCELORMITTAL

Complainant

Jaymin Patel

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 name or mark in which the complainant has rights
  2. 2 Whether the respondent's registration is abusive

Ratio Decidendi

The complainant established rights in the name and mark ARCELORMITTAL, the domain name is identical or similar, and the respondent's registration was abusive. Transfer of the domain name was ordered.

Court Disposition

Transfer ordered

Orders

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