CASES & DECISIONS

YEAR DECISION
New: All decided cases have been profiled to enable search and filter on selected keywords.
 
Displaying the latest 10 cases
   
ZA2017-00265 RELX GROUP PLC vs. KARMA VENTY
  reedexpo.co.za - Pending
reedexhibitions.co.za - Pending
   
   
ZA2017-00264 KAUFLAND WARENHANDEL GMBH & CO. KG vs. FU WANG
  kaufland.co.za - Pending
   
   
ZA2017-00263 SMARTSTONE HOLDINGS (PTY) LTD vs. JAMES RICHARD METCALF
  bosunholdings.co.za - Pending
   
   
ZA2017-00262 MOZILLA CORPORATION AND MOZILLA FOUNDATION vs. ZHAO KE
  mozilla.co.za - Pending
   
   
ZA2017-00261 MEJERIFORENINGEN DANISH DAIRY BOARD vs. AKULINA ERMAKOVA
  Decision: Mejeriforeningen Danish Dairy Board vs. Akulina Ermakova lurpak.co.za - Transfer
   
   
ZA2017-00260 SUBINITE (PTY) LIMITED vs. IDOMAINS.CO.ZA PREMIUM DOMAIN BROKERS
  Decision: Subinite (Pty) Limited vs. iDomains.co.za Premium Domain Brokers darling.co.za - Transfer
   
   
ZA2017-00259 WINTEC INNOVATION (PTY) LTD vs. WYNAND VAN LOGGERENBERG
  Decision: Wintec Innovation (Pty) Ltd vs. Wynand van Loggerenberg winblock.co.za - Refused
   
   
ZA2017-00258 MINT MANAGEMENT TECHNOLOGIES (PTY) LIMITED vs. RYAN EPSTEIN
  mintaccessories.co.za - Pending
   
   
ZA2017-00257 TELKOM SA SOC LIMITED vs. LENNY MUNSAMI
  Decision: Telkom SA SOC Limited vs. Lenny Munsami nationalyellowpages.co.za - Transfer
   
   
ZA2017-00256 BID INDUSTRIAL HOLDINGS (PTY) LTD vs. ULTIMATE LINUX SOLUTIONS CC
  Decision: Bid Industrial Holdings (Pty) Ltd vs. Ultimate Linux Solutions CC mybidveststory.co.za - Transfer
   


notice

DECISIONS MADE BY AN ADJUDICATOR IN TERMS OF THE REGULATIONS WILL BE DISPLAYED ON THIS PAGE AS AND WHEN AVAILABLE.

Regulation 29

(1) An adjudicator must decide a dispute in accordance with the principles of law, on the basis of the Dispute, Response, and Reply, if any, and further statements or documents submitted in accordance with these Regulations.

(2) The Adjudicator must forward its Decision on the dispute to the provider within 14 days of its appointment under regulation 20.

(3) The Decision must be in writing, provide the reasons on which it is based, indicate the date on which it was rendered and identify the name of the Adjudicator.

(4) If three adjudicators consider a Dispute, the consentient views of at least two adjudicators shall constitute the Decision.

(5) If one Adjudicator has a dissentient view, such view should also accompany the Decision.

(6) Decisions and dissentient views must comply with the guidelines as to length set forth in the provider's supplementary procedure.

 

Regulation 9

The possible decisions pursuant to a Dispute before an adjudicator are limited to -

(a) in the case of abusive registrations the refusal of the Dispute or the transfer of the disputed domain name to the Complainant;

(b) in the case of offensive registrations the refusal of the Dispute or the deletion and prohibition of the domain name from future registration;

(c) a refusal of the Dispute as the Dispute constitutes reverse domain name hijacking.

 

Please review the Resources Page for assistance on viewing foreign decisions.