Swarovski AG v Zippon Hall (Summary Decision _Transfer) [2012] DRS 11680 (01 September 2012)

Swarovski AG v Zippon Hall (Summary Decision _Transfer) [2012] DRS 11680 (01 September 2012)

The Panel found that the domain name was identical or confusingly similar to the Complainant's trademark, that the Respondent had no rights or legitimate interests, and that the domain name was registered and used in bad faith. Transfer of the domain name to the Complainant was ordered.

Citation
[2012] DRS 11680
Parties
Complainant: Swarovski AG; Respondent: Zippon Hall
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
01 September 2012
Procedural Posture
Domain Name Dispute / Summary Decision
Outcome
Domain name transferred to Complainant
Legal Topics
Trademark Infringement, Domain Name Transfer
Intellectual Property Domain Name Law Trademark Infringement Domain Name Transfer

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 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Swarovski AG

Complainant

Zippon Hall

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Domain Name Dispute / Summary Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the domain name registered by the Respondent is identical or similar to a trademark in which the Complainant has rights
  2. 2 Whether the Respondent has rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name
  3. 3 Whether the domain name was registered or is being used in bad faith

Ratio Decidendi

The Panel found that the domain name was identical or confusingly similar to the Complainant's trademark, that the Respondent had no rights or legitimate interests, and that the domain name was registered and used in bad faith. Transfer of the domain name to the Complainant was ordered.

Court Disposition

Domain name transferred to Complainant

Orders

  • Transfer of the disputed domain name to Swarovski AG