Reassure Midco Limited v Super Privacy Service LTD C/o Dynadot (Summary Decision _Transfer) [2020] DRS 22766 (05 August 2020)

Reassure Midco Limited v Super Privacy Service LTD C/o Dynadot (Summary Decision _Transfer) [2020] DRS 22766 (05 August 2020)

The Panel found that the complainant had rights in the name, the domain name was identical or similar, and the registration was abusive, warranting transfer.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] DRS 22766
Parties
Complainant: Reassure Midco Limited; Respondent: Super Privacy Service LTD C/o Dynadot
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
05 August 2020
Procedural Posture
Domain Name Dispute / Summary Decision
Outcome
Transfer ordered
Legal Topics
Domain Name Dispute, Passing Off, Bad Faith Registration
Intellectual Property Internet Law Domain Name Dispute Passing Off Bad Faith Registration

Source-derived case record

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

Reassure Midco Limited

Complainant

Super Privacy Service LTD C/o Dynadot

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Domain Name Dispute / Summary Decision

  1. 1 Whether the domain name was registered in bad faith
  2. 2 Whether the domain name is identical or similar to a name in which the complainant has rights

Ratio Decidendi

The Panel found that the complainant had rights in the name, the domain name was identical or similar, and the registration was abusive, warranting transfer.

Court Disposition

Transfer ordered

Orders

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