689 Cabin Crew 89 -v- BASSA [2002] DRS 689 (28 December 2002)

BAILII [Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]

Nominet UK Dispute Resolution Service


You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Nominet UK Dispute Resolution Service >> Cabin Crew 89 -v- BASSA [2002] DRS 689 (28 December 2002)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/DRS/2002/689.html
Cite as: [2002] DRS 689

[New search] [Context] [Printable version] [Help]



Nominet UK Dispute Resolution Service


DRS 00689


Cabin Crew 89–v- BASSA


Decision of Independent Expert


1. Parties

Complainant:  Cabin Crew 89
Country:  GB


Respondent:  BASSA
Country:  GB
 

 

2. Disputed Domain Names

The domain name in dispute is < cc89.co.uk >.


3. Procedural Background

On 1 November 2002, the Complaint was lodged with Nominet.uk (hereinafter “Nominet”) in accordance with the Dispute Resolution Service Policy (hereinafter the “DRS Policy”) and hard copies of the Complaint were received in full on 7 November 2002. 

On 12 November 2002 Nominet validated the Complaint and Nominet sent a copy of the Complaint to the Respondent and inter alia advised the Respondent that the Procedure allowed the Respondent 15 days within which to respond to the Complaint.
 
On 9 December 2002 as no Response had been received Nominet proceeded to appoint an Expert to determine the dispute.
On 20 December 2002 Mr James Bridgeman was appointed as Expert having confirmed to Nominet that he knew of no reason why he could not properly accept the invitation to act as Expert in this case and further confirmed that he knew of no matters which ought to be drawn to the attention of the Parties, which might appear to call into question his independence and/or impartiality.
 

4. The Facts

According to the Complaint, the Complainant is a registered trade union that represents 8000 employees in the airline industry who work in the air (excluding the flight deck).

The Complainant has been in existence since 1989 and has continuously used the names “Cabin Crew 89” and “CC89” since that date.


5. The Parties’ Contentions

Complainant’s Submissions

The Complainant submits that the domain name in dispute is identical or similar to a name or mark in which the Complainant has rights and is an Abusive Registration in the hands of the Respondent. The Complainant wishes to have the domain name transferred to the Complainant.

In support of this application, the Complainant  further submits that the words and numbers “Cabin Crew 89” and “CC89”are “copyright trading identities” owned by the Complainant.

The Complainant submits that its website (main address <cc89.org> ) has been in existence for several years and is an established resource for cabin crew employees for information and advice related to their employment.

The Complainant submits that it has sole rights to the domain name cc89.co.uk.

According to the Complaint, the Respondent is a competitor organisation.

The Complainant submits that the Respondent’s action in registering and using the domain name cc89.co.uk is intended to take unfair and abusive advantage of the Complainant’s trading and operating identity.

In support of these submissions the Complainant has furnished a printed promotional brochure setting out details of the organisation and its services as evidence of use of the names “Cabin Crew 89” and “CC89”.

Respondent’s Submissions

There was no Response filed by the Respondent.


6. Discussion and Findings:

General

To succeed in this Complaint the Complainant must prove to the Expert pursuant to paragraph 2 of the DRS Policy, on the balance of probabilities, first, that it has rights, as defined in paragraph 1 of the DRS Policy, in respect of a name or mark identical or similar to the domain name in dispute and, secondly, that said domain name, in the hands of the Respondent, is an Abusive Registration, as defined in paragraph 1 of the DRS Policy.


Complainant’s Rights

The Complainant has asserted and has provided evidence in the form of a printed promotional brochure that it uses the names “Cabin Crew 89” and “CC89” as service marks in respect of inter alia the provision of various services including legal services, financial services, insurance services and other services relating to its activities as a trade union. In the view of this Expert, the Complainant has established that that it has rights, as defined in paragraph 1 of the DRS Policy, in respect of a name or mark identical or similar to the domain name in dispute.


Abusive Registration

Paragraph 1 of the DRS Policy defines “Abusive Registration” as:-

 “a Domain Name which either:
i. was registered or otherwise acquired in a manner, which at the time when the registration or acquisition took place, took unfair advantage of or was unfairly detrimental to the Complainant’s Rights; or

ii. has been used in a manner, which took unfair advantage of or was unfairly detrimental to the Complainant’s Rights.”

A non-exhaustive list of factors, which may be evidence that the domain name is an Abusive Registration is set out in paragraph 3.a of the DRS Policy inter alia as follows:
  
“ i. Circumstances indicating that the Respondent has registered or otherwise acquired the Domain Name:

A. primarily for the purposes of selling, renting or otherwise transferring the Domain Name to the Complainant or to a competitor of the Complainant, for valuable consideration in excess of the Respondent’s documented out-of-pocket costs directly associated with acquiring or using the Domain Name;

B. as a blocking registration against a name or mark in which the Complainant has Rights; or

C. primarily for the purpose of unfairly disrupting the business of the Complainant;”

The Respondent has failed to file a Response in these proceedings. In the circumstances as outlined in the Complaint, this Expert must conclude that on the balance of probabilities the Respondent registered the domain name, that is identical to the Complainants service mark as a blocking registration against a name or mark in which the Complainant has rights or primarily for the purpose of unfairly disrupting the business of the Complainant.

The Complainant has therefore succeeded in establishing both elements of the test in paragraph 2(a) of the DRS Policy and is entitled to the relief sought.

7. Decision

This Expert therefore directs that the domain name < cc89.co.uk> be transferred to the Complainant.

 

James Bridgeman                                                      

28 December 2002

 


BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/DRS/2002/689.html