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
Parties
Reassure Midco Limited
Complainant
Super Privacy Service LTD C/o Dynadot
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Domain Name Dispute / Summary Decision
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the domain name was registered in bad faith
- 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.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment