[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	Nominet UK Dispute Resolution Service
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Nominet UK Dispute Resolution Service >> Ali v Saeed [2009] DRS 6399 (27 January 2009) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/DRS/2009/6399.html Cite as: [2009] DRS 6399

[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]

 
DISPUTE RESOLUTION SERVICE DRS 6399
Decision of Independent Expert (Summary Decision)
MOHAMMED ALI and HAFEEZ SAEED
1. The Parties:

Complainant: Mohammed Ali

Country: United Kingdom

Respondent: Hafeez Saeed

Country: United Kingdom

2. The Domain Name(s):

www.move2homes.co.uk

3. Notification of Complaint

I hereby certify that I am satisfied that Nominet has sent the complaint to the respondent in accordance with paragraphs 2 and 4 of the Procedure. x Yes No

4. Rights

The complainant has, to my reasonable satisfaction, shown Rights in respect of a name or mark which is identical or similar to the Domain name.

Yes x No

5. Abusive Registration

The complainant has, to my reasonable satisfaction, shown that the Domain Name move2homes.co.uk is an Abusive Registration

N/A

Yes No

6. Other Factors

I am satisfied that no other factors apply which would make a summary decision unconscionable in all the circumstances

N/A

X Yes No

7. Comments (optional)

In accordance with paragraphs 2 and 4 of the Procedure Nominet sent the Complaint to the Respondent by letter and e-mail to two different e-mail addresses. The deadline for a response was 2 December 2008. The Respondent did not file a response by the deadline. In the absence of a response the Complainant applied for a summary decision under paragraph 5e of the Procedure.

The Respondent subsequently sent a non-standard statement to Nominet pursuant to paragraph 13b of the Procedure. The brief explanation of why there was an exceptional need for the non-standard submission was that the Respondent did not receive the letter from Nominet and the Complaint only came to his notice when he read his e-mails on the weekend of 14 December 2008. The letter was returned by the Royal Mail marked "not called for". The Respondent does not suggest that the address that the letter was sent to was not his current address. In any event, the registrant of a domain name is required, under paragraph 4 of the Terms and Conditions of Domain Name Registration, to give and keep Nominet notified of their correct postal address and e-mail address. The Expert does not believe that the Respondent has demonstrated that there is an exceptional need for a non-standard submission and the Expert did not call for the remainder of the non-standard submission to be passed to him.

The Complainant is Mohammed Ali who says that he is the sole director of Move 2 Homes Limited. He claims that the Respondent, who he says is a former director of that company, registered the Domain Name in his personal name but for the benefit of the company. The Policy requires the Complainant to prove that they have rights in a name or mark which is identical or similar to the Domain Name which means rights enforceable by the Complainant, whether under English law or otherwise. The Information for Complainants that is published by Nominet makes it clear that the Complainant should explain how the rights arise and provide evidence in support. The Complainant has not explained what rights he (as opposed to the company) has in the name or mark Move 2 Homes. The Complainant complains that the Respondent registered the Domain Name in his personal name when it was for the benefit of the company and yet he seeks a transfer of the Domain Name into his personal name.

Under paragraph 5f of the Procedure if the Expert grants the Complainant's application for a summary decision, the Domain Name will be transferred to the Complainant. Accordingly, if the application was granted the outcome would be that the Domain Name would be transferred to the Complainant personally rather than to the company (which may have enforceable rights in the name). He says that the Domain Name was, and is for the use of Move 2 Homes Limited and not for any other purpose. The Complainant has not established that he personally has any enforceable rights in the Domain Name.

In the circumstances the Expert is not satisfied that the Complainant (as opposed to the company) has established that he has rights in a name or mark that is identical or similar to the Domain Name.

It may well be that the company Move 2 Homes Limited has such rights and it is of course open to the company to submit a complaint.

8. Decision

The Expert is not satisfied that the Complainant has rights in respect of a name or mark that is identical to the Domain Name and accordingly the Complainant has failed to satisfy the second condition set out in paragraph 7c of the Policy. The Expert therefore directs that no action is taken in relation to the Domain Name.

Signed: Andrew Clinton Dated: 27 January 2009