Complainant’s claim denied even in the absence of the Respondent

C

UDRP decisions are a hallmark of authenticity. The Court doesn’t give benefit to one of the parties if the other fails to appear before the panel in the case’s proceedings. The Court still imparts appropriate justice to both the parties. 

The Forum was at the center of the dispute for the domain name EquityTrustCompany.com. The Complainant was Equity Trust Company. The Complainant had acquired the trademark over ‘EQUITY TRUST COMPANY’ in May 2010. The Complainant also claimed use of the mark for commerce for the first time in 2003.

The Respondent had registered the domain name in June 2005, way before the acquisition of the trademark by the Complainant. The Respondent is also a competitor of the Complaint. The domain name points to a website that offers services similar to the Correspondent. In fact, the Respondent didn’t even appear for the processings. 

Although the Complaint claims first usage before the Domain Name registration, the evidence of this isn’t very strong. In such cases primacy is given to the registration date either the domain or the trademark. 

The Complaint was denied. 


Read the full case here

By The Wizard

Join us on Instagram

Verified by ExactMetrics