Geography Reference
In-Depth Information
(c)
Consejo Regulador del Cava v Adrian Lucas
224
The Complainant's name translates into English as The Regulating Council of
Cava. It is a trade body attached to the Spanish Ministry of the Environment
and Rural and Marine Affairs. It was established in 1993. Its functions include
control of production processes for a particular variety of sparkling wine called
'Cava' originating primarily from certain specified municipalities mainly in and
around the Catalonian region of Spain. The Complainant was the registered
proprietor of a collective device mark filed with OHIM on 12 December 2003
'CONSEJO REGULADOR CAVA' for 'sparkling wine (cava)' and services
relating to the sale and distribution of sparkling wine (cava). The Complainant
was also the proprietor of a Community trade mark application filed on 28 May
2008 'CAVA DE LA TIERRA AL CORAZON (device)' for the same goods
and services as the previous registration. The Complainant was also the
proprietor of the domain name <crcava.es>, which it registered in 1999.
6.213
6.214
The disputed domain name, <cava.com>, was registered on 26 November 1996.
This domain name was connected to a directory page featuring sponsored links
to a variety of sites ranging from hotel sites to sites offering sparkling wine for
sale. Other links led to sites concerned with other wines and a range of soft
drinks. The Respondent's site indicated that the domain <cava.com> may be for
sale by its owner.
i. Identical or confusingly similar
The Panel accepted as fact that 'Cava' was protected in Spain and the European
Community as a reserved denomination and a GI. However, the Panel noted
that under the UDRP the Complainant was not able to rely on these. In relation
to the fact that the applicant's registered trade mark had as its most prominent
feature the word 'CAVA' in upper case, the Panel found it not difficult to
conclude that the disputed domain name was confusingly similar to it.
6.215
6.216
As for the Complainant's domain name, <crcava.es>, the Panel had insufficient
information to enable it to decide whether the Complainant's domain name
was an unregistered trade mark in which the Complainant had rights. For
example, the Panel did not know when the Complainant first started making
active use of that domain name, nor did the Panel know the extent to which (if
at all) the Complainant had promoted that domain name such as to give it the
status of a trade mark or service mark.
224
WIPO Case No D2008-1939.
