Nikki

Hi, I'm looking for an example decision that involves with paragraph 3(a)(v) of the DRS policy. I need to write about the decision but I couldn't find any decision that relates to that paragraph.

Paragraph 3(a)(v)
The domain name was registered as a result of a relationship between the Complainant and the Respondent, and the Complainant:

A. has been using the domain name registration exclusively; and

B. paid for the registration and/or renewal of the domain name registration.

If anyone knows or can help, it will be greatly appreciate.

Thank you

retired_member6

There was one involving three parties, I'll have a think. They divied the domain share between them, one sold theirs to the third with the first still holding it, then the third came back and bought the first out I think, then it all got a little heated and they cried and drs'd each other. It's on here somewhere as well but can't recall the domain.

NB: there's probably better examples but that one made me laugh the most.

Beasty

This is a recent one.

http://www.nominet.org.uk/digitalAss...nsinjuries.pdf

Nikki

Thanks Beasty. You are my angel

This decision relates to paragraph 3(a)(v) but does not use the paragraph to decide the dispute as the domain name was not registered as a result of the relationship between the parties. However, the expert took it as supportive evidence.

Can I ask for more help? It seems like nominet has never decided the dispute that the respondent provided a false contact detail, or maybe I haven't looked thoroughly. Is there any decision as a result of false contact detail? I couldn't find it from Typical case page.