denied ownership of

Legal procedures are based on facts and evidence. There are instances when a seemingly stronger side might lose the arbitration, in a situation where it lacks strong evidence to prove a key element of the case, as demonstrated in our current story.

WIPO was presented with a tough battle against the 4-lettered domain name The Complainant here is a  Finland based firm Veho Oy Ab, Finland. 

The Complainant deals with the transportation of vehicles and has the primary functioning domain name at The Complainant also owns the trademarks over VEHO in several European countries with the initial registration in April 1995. The Complainant also owns a EU trademark over the same,  registered in January 2009.

The Respondent registered the domain name in October 2009. The domain name is currently offered for a ‘strategic investment’. The domain name has also displayed stock images of vehicles earlier.

However, the Respondent contests that the mark VEHO is a derivative of Latin name ‘vehere’ which means ‘I cary’. The Respondent also presented that both the parties had a discussion about the purchase of the domain name. But, even after several rounds of talks an agreement on the price couldn’t be achieved. The Respondent thus claimed the Complaint as a Plan B. 

The panel found that although the domain name registration succeeds the date of trademark registration, a case of clear bad faith couldn’t be established. The facts submitted by the Respondent aren’t enough to prove that the Respondent registered the domain name in bad faith. A conversation between the parties does indicate towards the Complainant using the arbitration platform as Plan B. 

On the balance of probabilities, the Panel sided with the Respondent and denied the Complaint. 

You can read the full case here


  1. Mark Beck Avatar

    The disputed domain name currently resolves to a web page advertising the domain name as being “available for a strategic transaction”. A review of the historic screen captures (supplied in evidence with the Complaint) shows that the disputed domain name has been parked since 2011, and offered for sale via the web pages to which the disputed domain name has resolved since 2014. In 2010, the disputed domain name resolved to a website that appeared to offer news content relating to the entertainment industry.

Join the Discussion

Discover more from Domain Magazine

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading

Verified by ExactMetrics