Lidl Stiftung & Co. KG v.
Claim Number: FA2112001978501
Complainant: Lidl Stiftung & Co. KG of Neckarsulm, Germany.
Complainant Representative: HK2 Rechtsanwälte of Berlin, Germany.
Respondent: Redacted for Privacy / Privacy service provided by Withheld for Privacy ehf of Reykjavik, Capital Region, International, Iceland.
Respondent Representative: not represented.
REGISTRIES and REGISTRARS
Registry: GMO Registry, Inc.
Registrar: NameCheap, Inc.
The undersigned certifies that he has acted independently and impartially and to the best of his knowledge has no known conflict in serving as Examiner in this proceeding.
Debrett Gordon Lyons as Examiner.
Complainant submitted: December 28, 2021
Commencement: January 6, 2022
Default Date: January 21, 2022
Having reviewed the communications records, the Examiner finds that the Forum has discharged its responsibility under URS Procedure, Paragraphs 3 and 4 and Rule 4 of the Rules for the Uniform Rapid Suspension System (the "Rules").
Complainant requests that the domain name be suspended for the life of the registration.
Clear and convincing evidence.
Complainant belongs to the LIDL-Group, a well-known discount supermarket business headquartered in Germany, operating over ten thousand stores in 29 countries. The trademark “LIDL” is registered with international trademark authorities. The disputed domain name redirects Internet users to Complainant’s own website.
Even though the Respondent has defaulted, URS Procedure 1.2.6, requires Complainant to make a prima facie case, proven by clear and convincing evidence, for each of the following three elements to obtain an order that a domain name should be suspended.
1.2.6.1. that the registered domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a word mark: (i) for which the Complainant holds a valid national or regional registration and that is in current use; or (ii) that has been validated through court proceedings; or (iii) that is specifically protected by a statute or treaty in effect at the time the URS complaint is filed.
The evidence shows that Complainant holds a valid international registration which is in use. Further, the Examiner finds that the domain name is confusingly similar to the trademark and so finds the first element to be established.
1.2.6.2. that the Registrant has no legitimate right or interest to the domain name.
There is nothing to suggest Registrant is commonly known by the domain name or that it has trademark rights of its own. Respondent has used Complainant’s trademark without permission and used the domain name to direct Internet users to Complainant’s website. Accordingly, there is no evidence of preparations to use the domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services. The Examiner finds that Registrant has no legitimate right or interest in the domain name and that Complaint has established the second element.
1.2.6.3. that the domain was registered and is being used in bad faith.
The Examiner finds that Registrant has intentionally attempted to attract for commercial gain (through redirection fees), Internet users to Registrant’s website by creating a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant’s trademark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of Registrant’s website.
After reviewing the Complainant’s submissions, the Examiner determines that
the Complainant has demonstrated all three elements of the URS by a standard of clear and convincing evidence; the Examiner hereby Orders the following domain name be SUSPENDED for the duration of the registration.
<lidl-online.shop>
Debrett Gordon Lyons, Examiner
Dated: January 23, 2022
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page