Westmore · UDRP DecisionLapreva.com
The Panel ordered transfer of <lapreva.com> after the Respondent consented to transfer during the proceeding. Because registrar lock prevented implementation without an order, the Panel issued the transfer order without deciding the three substantive UDRP elements and without making findings adverse to the Respondent.
The timeline behind lapreva.com
Registration, the decision and the archived record of what this domain actually displayed — from public RDAP and the Internet Archive.
Westmore reconstructs the full history behind lapreva.com — from public RDAP and the Internet Archive — as part of UDRP Intelligence:
This case illustrates a consent-to-transfer disposition in which the Panel issued an order solely to overcome registrar lock. It is useful as a procedural example but provides no substantive precedent on trademark rights, legitimate interests, or bad faith.
Result of record. The panel's reasoning and decisive facts behind each element are in the Intelligence dossier below.
WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION LARS AG v. Greg Atkinson Case No. D2011-1081 1. The Parties The Complainant is LARS AG of Zurich, Switzerland represented by Dr. Lusuardi AG, Switzerland. The Respondent is Greg Atkinson of Alberta, Calgary, Canada. 2. The Domain Name and Registrar The disputed domain name <lapreva.com> (the “Domain Name”) is registered with 1&1 Internet AG. 3. Procedural History The Complaint was filed with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (the “Center”) on June 27, 2011, naming Greg Atkinson as Respondent, even though the Domain Name was at the time registered in the name of the Registrar. On June 27, 2011, the Center transmitted by email to 1&1 Internet AG a request for registrar verification in connection with the Domain Name. On June 29, 2011, 1&1 Internet AG transmitted by email to the Center its verification response confirming that the Domain Name had been registered in the name of the Registrar on behalf of the Respondent and that the Registrar would amend the registrant and contact information to show the Respondent as registrant. The Center sent an email communication to the Complainant on July 4, 2011, providing the registrant and contact information disclosed by the Registrar, and inviting the Complainant to submit an amendment to the Complaint. The Complainant filed a Communication electing not to amend the Complaint on July 6, 2011. The Center verified that the 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(a) and 4(a), the Center formally notified the Respondent of the Complaint, and the proceedings commenced on July 8, 2011. In accordance with the Rules, paragraph 5(a), the due date for Response was July 28, 2011. The Response was filed with the Center on July 29, 2011, and an Amended Response was filed with the Center on August 1, 2011. The Center appointed Alan L. Limbury as the sole panelist in this matter on August 8, 2011. 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. The Complainant filed an unsolicited supplementary submission on August 4, 2011. The Respondent filed an unsolicited supplementary submission on August 9, 2011, to which the Complainant replied on August 12, 2011. On August 14, 2011, the Respondent requested the Registrar to transfer the Domain Name to the Complainant and so notified the Center. As the Domain Name had been placed on “Registrar Lock” upon the commencement of this proceeding, an order from this Panel is necessary so as to give effect to the Respondent’s request. 4. Decision As the Respondent has consented to the transfer of the Domain Name to the Complainant, the Panel orders, without making any findings adverse to the Respondent, that the Domain Name <lapreva.com> be transferred to the Complainant. Alan L. Limbury Sole Panelist Dated: August 15, 2011
Source of record: WIPO . Reproduced for research; WIPO is the authoritative source.
What Westmore sees around lapreva.com
The decision is only the record. Westmore connects it to the cases, authorities, panelists, parties and domain evidence surrounding it.

A short, grounded explanation drawn only from this decision's record — not legal advice or a prediction.
Grounded in the Westmore record for this decision. Research/informational only — not legal advice or a prediction of any outcome.
The decision is only the beginning.
You've seen what happened. Now discover the deeper intelligence behind the case, the panelist, the parties and the authorities that matter.
Go beyond the public record: see how this case has been cited, find comparable decisions, analyze the panelist and apply the relevant authorities to your Matter.
Westmore Professional · $395/month
Research with UDRP IntelligenceWestmore AI drafts an attorney-review-ready UDRP response from your facts, grounded in the exact panel and closest precedent.
$895 one-time per matter · no subscription required. Self-help drafting aid — not legal advice.
Build your responseWestmore UDRP records draw on WIPO-indexed decisions and are provided for research and informational purposes only. Not legal advice, a clearance opinion, or a prediction of any outcome.