WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION Socotec S.A v. Socotec International Romania SRL Case No. DRO2018-0007 1. The Parties

The Complainant is Socotec S.A. of Saint Quentin en Yvelines, France, represented by CSC Digital Brand Services AB, Sweden.

The Respondent is Socotec International Romania SRL of Bucharest, Romania. 2. The Domain Name and Registrar

The disputed domain name is registered with ROTLD (the “Registrar”). 3. Procedural History

The Complaint was filed in English with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (the “Center”) on May 23, 2018. On May 23, 2018, the Center transmitted by email to the Registrar a request for registrar verification in connection with the disputed domain name. On May 24, 2018, the Registrar transmitted by email to the Center its verification response confirming that the Respondent is listed as the registrant and providing the contact details.

On May 31, 2018, the Center sent a communication in both Romanian and English to the Parties regarding the language of the proceeding. On June 1, 2018, the Complainant submitted an amended Complaint requesting English to be the language of proceeding. The Respondent did not comment on the language of the proceeding by the specified due date.

The Center verified that the Complaint together with the amended Complaint satisfied the formal requirements of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy” or “UDRP”), the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Rules”), and the WIPO Supplemental Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Supplemental Rules”).

In accordance with the Rules, paragraphs 2 and 4, the Center formally notified the Respondent in English and Romanian of the Complaint, and the proceedings commenced on June 11, 2018. In accordance with the Rules, paragraph 5, the due date for Response was July 1, 2018. The Respondent did not submit any response. Accordingly, the Center notified the Respondent’s default on July 9, 2018.

The Center appointed Beatrice Onica Jarka as the sole panelist in this matter on July 11, 2018. The Panel finds that it was properly constituted. The Panel has submitted the Statement of Acceptance and Declaration of Impartiality and Independence, as required by the Center to ensure compliance with the Rules, paragraph 7. 4. Factual Background

The Complainant is Socotec S.A., a French company with headquarters in Saint-Quentin-en Yvelines, France.

The Complainant was established in 1953 out of the Bureau Sécuritas, France’s first building inspection body set up in 1929.

The Complainant has built its reputation over 60 years as an independent third party assisting companies in the areas of quality, health and safety and the environment.

The Complainant is in France a market leader in construction and has also positioned itself as a European leader in IT services for the construction and infrastructure sectors.

Socotec Group has diversified its skills and business activities in the markets for construction, real estate, infrastructure, energy, industry, local authorities, services, healthcare and retail and has a consolidated revenue of EUR 650 million with operations in 25 countries.

The Complainant employs more than 6,500 individuals worldwide with more than 4,500 of those employees spread across 200 locations in France.

The Complainant is the owner of SOCOTEC trademark registrations across various jurisdictions including French trademark registration no. 1613632, registered on January 20, 1988 for classes 6, 9, 19, 35, 36, 37 and 42, and international trademark registration no. 595125, registered on December 22, 1992 for classes 6, 9, 19, 35, 36, 37 and 42.

The Complainant also registered a number of domain names incorporating the term “socotec”, among them being and , registered in 1997 and 1996 respectively, with significant ranking in France and globally.

The Respondent registered the disputed domain name on October 15, 2004. The disputed domain name redirects to the Complainant’s website. 5. Parties’ Contentions A. Complainant

The Complainant contends that:

- It is the owner of SOCOTEC trademark registrations across various jurisdictions and internationally,

- The disputed domain name is identical and confusingly similar with the Complainant’s trademark SOCOTEC, as it incorporates the Complainant’s SOCOTEC trademark,

- The Respondent’s use of the disputed domain name contributes further to the confusion with the Complainant and the Complainant’s trademark SOCOTEC as the Respondent uses the disputed domain name to redirect Internet users to the website found at at the Complainant’s primary domain name ,

- The Respondent is not sponsored by or affiliated with the Complainant in any way and the Complainant has not given the Respondent permission to use the Complainant’s trademarks in any manner, including in domain names,

- The Respondent is not commonly known by the disputed domain name, which evinces a lack of rights or legitimate interests. Although the WhoIs database indicates that the Respondent is called Socotec International Romania SRL it is the Complainant’s claim that the Respondent has falsely identified itself as, or associated with, the Complainant and this can be inferred more from the contact email address which is “socotecromania@[...]”, whereas the Complainant’s domain names and are both registered to the email address “[...]@”.

- The Complainant’s SOCOTEC trademarks and domain name registrations predate the registration of the disputed domain name by the Respondent,

- By registering a domain name that incorporates in its entirety the Complainant’s famous SOCOTEC trademark, thus resulting in a domain name identical to said trademark, the Respondent has created a domain name that is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademark, as well as its own domain names. As such, the Respondent has demonstrated a knowledge of and familiarity with the Complainant’s brand and business,

- The Respondent has registered the disputed domain name under false details that would imply that Respondent is, or at a minimum associated with, the Complainant as the WhoIs lists the Respondent as “Socotec International Romania SRL” and the Respondent is using the disputed domain name to redirect Internet users to the Complainant’s own website at its primary domain name,

- The Respondent registered the disputed domain name being aware of the Complainant’s brands,

- Furthermore, the Respondent’s use of the disputed domain name constitutes a disruption of the Complainant’s business and qualifies as bad faith regi