Murphy v Dutton [2009] DRS 6342 (10 February 2009)

Murphy v Dutton [2009] DRS 6342 (10 February 2009)

The complainant, Mr H. G. and A. De Rooy trading as Polder Care, has established unregistered rights in the mark 'Polder Care'. The respondent registered the domain name primarily as a blocking registration, which was unfairly detrimental to the complainant's rights, constituting abusive registration under the Nominet DRS Policy.

Citation
[2009] DRS 6342
Parties
Complainant: Hazel Murphy; Respondent: Keith Dutton
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
10 February 2009
Procedural Posture
Domain Name Dispute / Decision of Independent Expert
Outcome
complaint upheld
Legal Topics
Domain Name Registration, Abusive Registration, Unregistered Trademark Rights
Intellectual Property Internet Law Domain Name Registration Abusive Registration Unregistered Trademark Rights

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hazel Murphy

Complainant

Keith Dutton

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Domain Name Dispute / Decision of Independent Expert

Legal Issues

  1. 1 whether the complainant has rights in the mark 'Polder Care'
  2. 2 whether the domain name registration by the respondent constitutes abusive registration

Ratio Decidendi

The complainant, Mr H. G. and A. De Rooy trading as Polder Care, has established unregistered rights in the mark 'Polder Care'. The respondent registered the domain name primarily as a blocking registration, which was unfairly detrimental to the complainant's rights, constituting abusive registration under the Nominet DRS Policy.

Court Disposition

complaint upheld

Orders

  • domain name poldercare.co.uk to be transferred to Mr H. G. De Rooy