The Complainant ran a compact disc business. It was the registered owner of the Canadian trade-mark CD PLUS as well as the domain name cdplus.com. The domain name resolved to a customized Internet portal.

The Registrant did not file a Response to the Complaint, and accordingly the Complainant elected as per Rule 6(5) of the CIRA Domain Name Dispute Resolution Rules ("CDRR") to reduce the three member Panel to a single arbitrator.

Under the CIRA Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy ("CDRP") the Panel is required to consider three issues: whether the domain name is confusingly similar to a mark in which the Complainant had rights, whether the Registrant has a legitimate interest in the domain name and whether the domain name was registered in bad faith.

The Panel began by finding the disputed domain name to be "virtually identical" to the Complainant's trade-mark and thus held that it was confusingly similar. Further, there was no evidence suggesting that the Registrant had any legitimate interest in the domain name.

The Complainant, however, failed to establish bad faith registration, as required by paragraph 3.7 of the CDRP. The Complaint did not allege that the domain name was registered in bad faith and failed to adduce any evidence in this regard. Thus, the Panel was not able to conclude on a balance of probabilities that the domain was registered in bad faith.