UDRP Panel Denies Claim On JoanCollins.com: Not Enough Evidence That It Was The Real Joan Collins

The decision has been published in the JoanCollins.com UDRP case and basically the panel found the Complainant and/or its representative did a lousy job in the proceeding.

The panel seemed as it would have ruled had the complainant been the real Joan Collins and had they pleaded their case properly with providing supporting evidence which they panel found they did not.

The one member panel said:

“”This Panel has found unsatisfactory a number of aspects of the way this case has been prosecuted by the Complainant’s representative. The manner in which the Complainant’s representative has prepared the Complaint, and has responded to the Administrative Panel Procedural Orders No. 1 and No. 3, leave this Panel unable to determine with any confidence who, exactly, is the person whom the Complainant’s representative is representing. It also leaves this Panel with a lingering concern about whether the Complainant’s representative is acting with the full authorization of the Complainant (whoever that may be). This concern has arisen because the Complaint as prepared by the Complainant’s representative lacks obviously relevant detail, and the responses provided by the Complainant’s representative to this Panel’s various orders requesting specific information have been notably vague. Should it later transpire that the Complainant’s representative was representing the well-known actress Joan Collins but without her full authorization, or was representing some other “Joan Collins”, the present decision should not preclude the well-known actress Joan Collins from seeking appropriate redress under the Policy in connection with the Respondent’s registration and use of this particular disputed domain name. In case the above should transpire, this Panel wishes to record that the decision below is made expressly without prejudice to the possibility of a subsequent complaint being filed under the Policy by the well-known actress Joan Collins, and wishes to express the view that any such filing should not be precluded by the principles under the Policy regarding re-filed complaints.”

The Complainant “Joan Collins” of London, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland was represented by Michael Meehan, Atlantic Optical (UK) Ltd, United Kingdom.