The Complainant operates an international chauffeured limousine service business in association with the CAREY trademark. The Complainant has operated its limousine service business in association with the CAREY trademark in Canada since 1982.
The Panel noted that while the Complainant failed to provide evidence of trademark searches to indicate that the Registrant does not have a legitimate interest in the term “CAREY,” it found that the distinct nature of the CAREY trademark, and the Registrant’s use of the Domain Name for a deceptive web site (reproducing portions of the Complainant’s web site) were sufficient to satisfy the Complainants’ evidentiary burden to provide some evidence that the Registrant had no legitimate interest. With respect to bad faith, the Panel noted that there is rarely “direct evidence” of bad faith and in most cases it is based on common sense inferences of the registrant’s conduct and other surrounding circumstances. In this case, the trademark was registered for several years prior to the domain name registration, the domain name contains additional descriptive terms implying the registrant knew of the Complainant’s business, and the Registrant’s web site copied substantial parts of the Complainant’s web site.
You can read the decision here.