InfraVision Ltd v Moylan [2009] DRS 6712 (13 March 2009)

InfraVision Ltd v Moylan [2009] DRS 6712 (13 March 2009)

The complainant established common law rights in the name 'InfraVision' through its own and its parent company's trading history and goodwill. The respondent's registration was not independent but was connected to the original registrant, a competitor, and was primarily intended to block the complainant or disrupt its business. The timing, relationships, and conduct surrounding the registration made the respondent's account implausible. The domain name, in the respondent's hands, was an abusive registration under the Policy.

Citation
[2009] DRS 6712
Parties
Complainant: InfraVision Limited; Respondent: Mike Moylan
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
13 March 2009
Procedural Posture
Domain Name Dispute (nominet UK Drs) / Expert Determination
Outcome
Domain name transfer ordered
Legal Topics
Domain Name Disputes, Passing Off, Abusive Registration, Common Law Rights
Intellectual Property Information Technology Domain Name Disputes Passing Off Abusive Registration Common Law 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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

InfraVision Limited

Complainant

Mike Moylan

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Domain Name Dispute (nominet UK Drs) / 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 established common law rights in the name 'InfraVision' through its own and its parent company's trading history and goodwill. The respondent's registration was not independent but was connected to the original registrant, a competitor, and was primarily intended to block the complainant or disrupt its business. The timing, relationships, and conduct surrounding the registration made the respondent's account implausible. The domain name, in the respondent's hands, was an abusive registration under the Policy.

Court Disposition

Domain name transfer ordered

Orders

  • The domain name infravision.co.uk is to be transferred to the complainant.