The Complainant is The Caravan Club, England ("Complainant"). The Respondent is Mrgsale, England ("Respondent").

The domain name at issue is "THECARAVANCLUB.COM", registered with Network Solutions Inc ("NSI").

The Panelist certifies that he or she has acted independently and impartially and to the best of his or her knowledge, has no known conflict in serving as the panelist in this proceeding.

Hon. James A. Carmody, as Panelist.

Complainant submitted a Complaint to the National Arbitration Forum ("The Forum") electronically on July 31, 2000; The Forum received a hard copy of the Complaint on July 31, 2000.

On July 31, 2000, NSI confirmed by e-mail to The Forum that the domain name "THECARAVANCLUB.COM" is registered with NSI and that the Respondent is the current registrant of the name. NSI has verified that Respondent is bound by the Network Solutions Service Agreement Version 5.0 and has thereby agreed to resolve domain-name disputes brought by third parties in accordance with ICANNís UDRP.

On August 4, 2000, a Notification of Complaint and Commencement of Administrative Proceeding (the "Commencement Notification"), setting a deadline of August 24, 2000 by which Respondent could file a Response to the Complaint, was transmitted to Respondent via e-mail, post and fax, to all entities and persons listed on Respondentís registration as technical, administrative and billing contacts, and to postmaster@thecaravanclub.com by e-mail.

Having received no Response from Respondent, using the same contact details and methods as were used for the Commencement Notification, The Forum transmitted to the parties a Notification of Respondent Default.

On August 28, 2000, pursuant to Complainantís request to have the dispute decided by a Single Member panel, The Forum appointed the Hon. James A. Carmody as Panelist.

Having reviewed the communications records, the Administrative Panel (the "Panel") finds that The Forum has discharged its responsibility under Paragraph 2(a) of the Uniform Rules "to employ reasonably available means calculated to achieve actual notice to Respondent." Therefore, the Panel may issue its Decision based on the documents submitted and in accordance with the ICANN Policy, ICANN Rules, The Forumís Supplemental Rules and any rules and principles of law that the panel deems applicable, without the benefit of any Response from the Respondent.

The Complainant requests that the domain name be transferred from the Respondent to the Complainant.

A. Complainant

The Complainant contends that the domain name in question infringes on its registered trademark and is identical and confusingly similar to its registered mark. The Complainant contends that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the domain name and that it was registered to undermine the Complainantís reputation and goodwill by provoking confusion for consumers. The Complainant contends that the Respondent registered and used the domain name in bad faith.

B. Respondent

The Respondent submitted no response in this matter.

The Complainant provides caravan sites, services, information, discounts, insurance and general European travel services for touring caravanners, motor caravanners, and trailer tents within Europe and the British Isles.

Both parties are located in the United Kingdom.

The Complainant owns multiple trademark registrations in various classes in the United Kingdom for the mark THE CARAVAN CLUB.

Trademark Registrations

The Respondent registered the domain name "THECARAVANCLUB.COM" on March 13, 2000. The Respondent has not created a website for this domain name.

The Complainant has attempted to contact the Respondent on several occasions. No reply has ever been received from the Respondent.

The Respondent has failed to submit a response to the Complaint in this UDRP matter. Based on Uniform Rule 14(b), the Panel shall accept all reasonable inferences of fact submitted in the Complainant as true.

Paragraph 4(a) of the ICANN Uniform Domain Name Dispute Policy ("Policy") requires that the complainant must prove each of the following three elements to obtain an order that a domain name should be cancelled or transferred:

(1) the domain name registered by the Respondent is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights;

(2) the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and

(3) the domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.

The Complainant has rights in the registered mark THE CARAVAN CLUB. The domain name in question is identical to the Complainantís registered mark. See Hormel Foods Corp. and Hormel Foods, LLC v. Spotted Cow Media, FA 95067 (Nat. Arb. Forum July 31, 2000) (finding that the domain name <kidskitchen.com> is identical to the Complainantís trademark KIDSKITCHEN).

The Complainant asserts that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the domain name in question.

The Complainant has owned and used its mark THE CARAVAN CLUB for seven years. The Respondent has submitted no evidence that it is commonly known by the domain name, which is totally comprised of the Complainantís mark. Policy  4.c.(ii).

The Respondent has also not submitted any evidence that it is using the domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods and services or for a legitimate or fair use. Policy  4.c.(i), (iii).

The Respondent also has no connection with the Complainant and has no authorization to use its registered mark. See Fanuc Ltd v. Machine Control Services, FA 93667 (Nat. Arb. Forum Mar. 13, 2000) (finding that Respondent had no rights or legitimate interest because Respondent does not own the registered mark, has no permission from the Complainant to use the mark, nor is affiliated with the Fanuc business in any way).

Based on the above, the Panel finds that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the domain name in question.

The Complainant contends that the Respondent has registered and used the domain name in bad faith.

The Respondent has made no use of the domain name or website that connects with the domain name. Passive holding of a domain name permits an inference of registration and use in bad faith. See CBS Broadcasting, Inc. v. LA-Twilight-Zone, D2000-0397 (WIPO June 19, 2000) (finding that given the long use and fame of the Complainantís mark, the Respondentís conduct is evidence of bad faith).

Registration of a well-known trademark by a party with no connection to the owner of the trademark and no authorization and no legitimate purpose to utilize the mark reveals bad faith. See Charles Jourdan Holding AG v. AAIM, D2000-0403 (WIPO June 27, 2000) (finding that the domain name in question is "so obviously connected with the Complainant and its products that its very use by someone with no connection with the Complainant suggests opportunistic bad faith).

Based on the above, the Panel concludes that the domain name was registered and used in bad faith by the Respondent.

Having established all three elements required by the ICANN Policy Rule 4(a), it is the decision of the panel that the requested relief be granted.

Accordingly, for all of the foregoing reasons, it is ordered that the domain name, "THECARAVANCLUB.COM" be transferred from the Respondent to the Complainant.