WIPO to Manage ".uk" Domain Name Disputes from 7 July 2026

 

Jane Lambert

For the last 30 years, NominetUK has managed the ".uk" domain space (see Thirty years of Nominet Guardians of .UK by Paul Fletcher 27 May 2026). For the last 25 of those years, its Dispute Resolution Service ("DRS") has resolved disputes over entitlement to ".uk" domain names.  From 7 July 2026, the DRS will be managed by the Arbitration and Mediation Centre ("AMC") of the World Intellectual Property Organization ("WIPO").

The WIPO is one of five dispute resolution service providers that the ICANN ("Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers") has authorized to resolve gTLD (generic top-level domain) disputes.  The WIPO also assists more than 85 national domain space operators to resolve ccTLD (country code top-level domain) disputes in their jurisdictions.  More information on the WIPO's ccTLD services is available on the page headed "Protect your Intellectual Property online with WIPO’s ccTLD Services" on the WIPO's website.

Information on the changes to dispute resolution in the United Kindom after 7 July 2026 is available from both the WIPO and Nominet.  The WIPO published the announcement "Changes to Dispute Resolution for .UK (United Kingdom)" on its website on 2 June 2026.  Nominet published "Nominet’s DRS: New Administrators, same experts, policies, mediation and fees" on 2r May 2026.  There is also a "Service Update to the DRS" on Nominet's website which was last updated on 8 June 2026. 

Under "What's Changing and When" on that web page, Nominet states: 

"From 7th July 2026, administration of DRS cases will transfer to World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), an established global provider of domain dispute resolution services. This change forms part of the .UK Standardisation programme, which modernises how .UK is managed.

The policy and overall direction of the DRS will remain with Nominet, as a core part of our guardianship of .UK."

Under the column heaading "What's Staying the Same", Nominet writes:

• "The DRS Policy remains unchanged, including the types of disputes that can be raised.Nominet’s trained mediators will continue offering free mediation.
• The composition of the Experts panel who make independent decisions will remain unchanged.
• Decision review will continue to be conducted by the review group within the Experts panel, no other party will review decisions.
• Appeals against decisions will still be possible as they are currently under the DRS Policy.
• Nominet’s teams will continue engaging with registrars as they do today to identify the appropriate registrant if they are behind a proxy service.
• Nominet’s teams will continue with the established process to implement the experts’ decisions."

Under "What's Changing" Nominet advises:

• "DRS cases will be raised and managed through WIPO’s system.
• WIPO’s experienced case managers will guide each dispute through the process, as per the DRS Policy.
• All DRS decisions (existing and new) will be searchable and available on WIPO’s website.
• Eventually, all decisions will also be available on nominet.uk and the Decision Search Tool will be retired.
• The same fees will apply as before, however no VAT will be applied. Payment will be made through WIPO."

There is a "Further Information" menu towards the bottom of the page.

WIPO has managed disputes in the ".cymru" and the ".wales" domains for Nominet under the UDRP (Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy) for several years.  I have written about the topic in Welsh Top Level Domain Names on 12 April 2019 in NIPC Cymru.   One of the issues that the "Further Information" menu addresses is "Impact on .cymru and .wales domain name disputes."  The advice is that there is no change and disputes can be resolved through the UDRP and the Uniform Rapid Suspension System. 

Further information on domain names generally can be obtained from the "Domain Name Resources" page on NIPC Branding.  Anyone wishing to discuss this article may call me on +44 (0)20 7404 5252 during UK office hours or send me a message through my contact form at any time.

WIPO's Expedited Domain Name Dispute Resolution Service

WIPO's Geneva Offices

Author Melatron Licence CC BY-SA 3.0  Source Wikimedia Commons

 

Jane Lambert

The World Intellectual Property Organization ("WIPO") domain name dispute resolution service can already resolve a dispute between a trade mark owner and a domain name holder in less time than it takes for statements of case to be exchanged in England and Wales.  The fee that the WIPO charges for resolving the dispute is US$1,500, which is less than many advocates would charge for settling particulars of claim.   That sum is irrecoverable in domain name dispute resolution proceedings, but it will often be no more or even less than the difference between the costs that a successful claimant might spend on launching an interim injunction application and the amount that he or she might recover on a summary assessment.

Domain name dispute resolution will be even faster under a scheme announced yesterday by the WIPO (see Updated WIPO UDRP Fee Schedule and NEW Services).  Under that scheme, decisions can be delivered within a month of filing the complaint.  Claims under the scheme will be managed by a dedicated team of WIPO employees and decided by a special roster of panellists.  There is an additional cost.    Complainants will be charged US$4,000 instead of US$1,500 for the current service.   US$3,000 of that money will go to the panellist, and the rest to the WIPO for administration

This scheme will be suitable for generic top-level domain name disputes (domain names ending in ".com", ".net", ".org" and similar suffixes) and some country code domain name disputes that use the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy, where parties choose their dispute to be resolved by a single panellist.  It would appear to include ".wales" and ".cymru" domain name disputes (see Jane Lambert Welsh Top Level Domain Names 12 Apr 2019 NIPC Cymru and Eich cartref chi. Eich Cymru chi. Eich Parth chi and Your Wales. Your Home. Your Domain). Disputes where a respondent opts for a three-member panel would fall outside the scheme.

Readers who wish to learn more about the scheme should read a helpful article by Doug Isenberg entitled A Faster Option for Resolving Domain Name Disputes Under the UDRP 9 March 2026, Gigalaw. Mr Isenberg is a Georgia lawyer who sits on the WIPO domain name dispute resolution panel and has vast experience in domain name dispute resolution.  For more basic information on domain name dispute resolution, see my resource page on the topic.

Anyone wishing to discuss this topic may call me on +44 (0)20 7404 5252 during normal UK office hours or send me a message through my contact page.

The Terms that are incorporated into every Agreement to register a Domain Name

 

Jane Lambert

One of the reasons why the internet works as well as it does is that there is a fast and relatively inexpensive procedure for resolving disputes between brand owners and domain name holders.  That procedure is contained in a document called the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy ("UDRP"). The UDRP is incorporated by reference into every agreement for the registration of a generic, and many country-code, top-level domain names.  Domain names ending in ".com", ".org" or ".biz" are examples of generic top-level domains ("gTLD"). Domain names ending in a two-letter country code such as ".nu" (Niue). ".tv" (Tuvalu) or ".ws" (Samoa) are country code top-level domains ("ccTLD").

The UDRP is incorporated into domain name registration agreements upon the insistence of a not-for-profit California company called the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers ("ICANN").  ICANN was established at the behest of the United States government to regulate the allocation of domain names.   ICANN subcontracts the registration of gTLD to businesses known as "registrars" and ccTLD to national domain name registration authorities.  One of the terms of ICANN's agreements with those registrars and authorities is that the registrar or authority will incorporate the UDRP into every agreement for the registration of a domain name that it enters with a third party. 

Para 1 of the Policy states that the UDRP's purpose is to set forth the terms and conditions in connection with a dispute between the domain name holder and brand owner over the registration and use of an internet domain name.  In the Policy the pronouns "we" and "us" refer to the registrar or other authority and "you" to the person registering, maintaining or renewing a domain name.

An important but frequently overlooked provision of the Policy is para 2 which sets out the representations and warranties that every person seeking to register, maintain or renew a domain name makes to the registrar or other authority.  It will be recalled that a representation is an assertion as to a fact, true on the date the representation is made, that is given to induce another party to enter into a contract or take some other action and a warranty is a promise of indemnity if the assertion is false.  These representations and warranties are as follows:

"(a)    the statements that you made in your Registration Agreement are complete and accurate; 

(b)    to your knowledge, the registration of the domain name will not infringe upon or otherwise violate the rights of any third party; 

(c)    you are not registering the domain name for an unlawful purpose; and 

(d) you will not knowingly use the domain name in violation of any applicable laws or regulations."

It is the responsibility of the person seeking registration, maintenance or renewal of the domain name to determine whether the domain name registration infringes or violates someone else's rights.  It will be appreciated that these are onerous obligations.

Para 3 of the Policy sets out the circumstances in which a registrar or other authority may cancel, transfer or otherwise make changes to a domain name registration.   These include "receipt of a decision of an Administrative Panel requiring such action in any administrative proceeding to which you were a party and which was conducted under this Policy".  

Para 4 sets out "the type of disputes for which you are required to submit to a mandatory administrative proceeding."  Subpara (a) provides:

"Applicable Disputes. You are required to submit to a mandatory administrative proceeding in the event that a third party (a "complainant") asserts to the applicable Provider, in compliance with the Rules of Procedure, that

(i) your domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the complainant has rights; and

(ii) you have no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and

(iii) your domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.

In the administrative proceeding, the complainant must prove that each of these three elements are present."

Para 4 states that those proceedings will be conducted before one of the following administrative-dispute-resolution service providers:

• Arab Center for Domain Name Dispute Resolution 
• Asian Domain Name Dispute Resolution Centre
• Canadian International Dispute Resolution Centre
• The Czech Arbitration Court Centre for Internet Disputes
• National Arbitration Forum, and
• World Intellectual Property Organization ("WIPO").

Each of those service providers has a list of panellists who will decide the dispute on the documents that the parties submit to them.   Those documents will always include a complaint and exhibits known as annexures from the brand owner.  Sometimes there will be a response from the domain name holder.  After receiving the complaint and any response that may have been filed the service provider will appoint a member of its panel to determine the dispute as a sole panellist.  If the respondent pays an additional fee each of the parties may choose a panellist for a three-member panel.

Most panellists are lawyers specializing in intellectual property or patent or trade mark attorneys.  I have served on the WIPO panel for nearly 20 years.  I have also drafted complaints for trade mark owners and responses for domain name holders.  Complaints and responses are submitted on online forms.   In the next and subsequent articles, I will discuss how to complete the complaint or response in a way that is likely to appeal to a panel. I will also warn of the sort of submissions that are likely to infuriate the panel. Anyone wishing to discuss this article may call me on +44 (0)20 7404 5252 or send me a message through my contact page. 

The IPR Help Desk's Domain Name Primer

 

Jane Lambert

The IPR-Helpdesk is an EU-funded service that supplies information on intellectual property to small and medium enterprises.  It carries out research into IP, publishes regular newsletters and other publications and holds webinars and other events.  Among its most useful publications are infographics that communicate essential information in a digestible format.

The latest of those infographics is on Domain Names and Cybersquatting which can be downloaded free of charge from the EU Publications Office.  That document explains what is a domain name, what is meant by the terms TLD (top-level domain), second-level domain and third-level domain and the difference between generic and country-code top-level domains.  It discusses how to register domain names, the practice of cybersquatting and what can be done to prevent it.

Readers who require further information on domain names, cybersquatting and dispute resolution may read my articles on Domain Name Disputes and Dispute Resolution Policies and Domain Name Glossary.  The Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy is one of the most successful alternative dispute resolution schemes in the world.  For a few hundred United States dollars, trade mark owners or those who could bring an action for passing off can apply for the transfer or cancellation of a domain name that is the same as or confusingly similar to their trade mark. 

Such applications come before administrative panels (of which I am one) who decide whether the domain name is the same or confusingly similar to a trade mark in which the complainant has rights,  whether the domain name holder has any rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name and whether the domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith.    If the panel finds in favour of the complainant on all those issues he or she can order the transfer of the domain name to the complainant or its cancellation,   The whole process is completed within a matter of weeks.   Usually, far less time than would be required for a claimant to issue and serve proceedings in the English courts and for the defendant to respond.   

The UDRP has been adopted by many other domain name registries including Wales (see my articles Welsh Top Leval Domain Names  12 April 2019 and Welsh IP Cases: D2016-0485 ALDI GmbH & Co. KG v. Mahfuz Ali  13 April 2019 NIPC Wales).  Many others such as Nominet regulates the ".uk" space and the Swiss domain name authority have similar policies.   To see how the process works just read my decision in Re D2022-1858 lancastersarchery.com.

Readers may be interested to learn that I do not confine myself to deciding domain name disputes.  I also advise and represent parties to such disputes.   As a panellist, I know exactly what the tribunal that will decide the dispute is looking for.   Having such insight, I can usually offer a much more successful and cost-effective service than most others.   Those who want to learn more can call me on +44 (0)20 7404 5252 or send me a message through my contact form.

WIPO Domain Name Panellists' Meeting 2017

(c) 2017 Jane Elizabeth Lambert: all rights reserved

jane Lambert

Every year the WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organization) invites its panel of neutrals to its headquarters in Geneva for a day's CPD training. It usually takes place on the third Monday of October though there have been years when it has taken place before and after that date. I am a member of the panel and I have attended this event every year since 2005.

The day focuses on practical issues in domain name dispute resolution and particularly the UDRP (Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy) but there is always some discussion on wider issues. Immediately before Francis Gurry became Director-General the highpoint of the day for me was his summary of important developments in intellectual property law and that was often my main motivation for attending the event. In recent years he has been unable to attend every panellists' meeting in person, but he nearly always manages to send us a video message. This year the high point was a talk by a senior executive of one of the world's leading domain name registries entitled "DNS Industry Highlights" and an update on new gTLDs by officials of INTA and the WIPO.

After Dr Gurry's video and a welcome from our chair, Erik Wibers, the meeting began with a resumé of the WIPO's activities in relation to domain name dispute resolution since last year's meeting. The year ended 31 Dec 2016 was a busy year for the WIPO with 3,036 case filings under the UDRP (a 10% increase over the previous year) and more than 1,200 new gTLDs operational (see WIPO Cybersquatting Cases Hit Record in 2016, Driven by New Top-Level Domain Names 16 March 2017). The WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Centre has also been appointed as a dispute resolution service provider for ".eu" and many other country code TLDs (see New .eu domain name ADR service and
Domain Name Dispute Resolution Service for Country Code Top Level Domains (ccTLDs)).

Another important development has been the publication of a new WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP Questions, Third Edition (“WIPO Jurisprudential Overview 3.0”). This is an analysis of panellists' decisions on various issues under the UDRP. It is important reading for panellists and parties' legal representatives. Most of the talks addressed aspects of the Overview and were given by senior colleagues on the WIPO panel.

If anyone wants to discuss this port or domain name dispute resolution generally, call me on +44 (0)20 7404 5252 during office hours or send me a message through my contact form.