By Design (UK) Ltd (t/a "mydeco") v Pepin [2007] DRS 4843 (13 September 2007)

By Design (UK) Ltd (t/a "mydeco") v Pepin [2007] DRS 4843 (13 September 2007)

The complainant established sufficient rights in the name 'mydeco' but failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the respondent's registration or use of the domain name was abusive under the DRS Policy. There was no evidence of intent to sell to the complainant or a competitor, nor a pattern of abusive registrations, and the respondent's preparations predated the complainant's public use.

Citation
[2007] DRS 4843
Parties
Complainant: By Design (UK) Limited t/a "mydeco"; Respondent: John Pepin
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
13 September 2007
Procedural Posture
Domain Name Dispute (nominet UK Drs) / Expert Determination
Outcome
Complaint denied
Legal Topics
Domain Names, Passing Off, Trade Mark Rights, Abusive Registration
Intellectual Property Internet Law Domain Names Passing Off Trade Mark Rights Abusive Registration

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

By Design (UK) Limited t/a "mydeco"

Complainant

John Pepin

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Domain Name Dispute (nominet UK Drs) / Expert Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the complainant has rights in the name 'mydeco' 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 established sufficient rights in the name 'mydeco' but failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the respondent's registration or use of the domain name was abusive under the DRS Policy. There was no evidence of intent to sell to the complainant or a competitor, nor a pattern of abusive registrations, and the respondent's preparations predated the complainant's public use.

Court Disposition

Complaint denied

Orders

  • No action to be taken in relation to the domain name