Our process: how a domain dispute runs from first call to transfer

A stranger holds the domain that matches your brand. They want five figures to sell it back. You have a trademark. But owning the trademark does not mean the domain transfers automatically – panels require you to prove all three elements of the UDRP, and the quality of your evidence decides whether you win or lose. Knowing how the domain dispute process actually runs, step by step, is the difference between a clean recovery and a wasted filing fee.

At COGNOMEN, every domain dispute engagement follows a defined sequence: case assessment, evidence assembly, forum selection, complaint drafting, the response window, the panel decision, and registrar implementation. For a standard UDRP complaint at WIPO, the forum filing fee starts at USD 1,500 for a single-member panel, and the case is normally resolved within about two months. Our legal fee for a turnkey UDRP recovery is indicative at USD 2,500 – 4,000, set after a case assessment. No outcome is guaranteed; domain disputes turn on facts and panel discretion.

This page explains what happens at each stage, what we need from you, and what can affect the cost or the timeline.

Stage 1: Case assessment – does this dispute warrant filing?

The first conversation is a diagnostic, not a pitch. We look at three things simultaneously: whether your trademark rights are strong enough to anchor the first UDRP element, whether the registrant's conduct evidence is clear enough to satisfy the bad-faith limb, and whether a UDRP is even the right route for this domain and this zone.

Many callers arrive assuming the UDRP is the only path. It is not always the best one. A .de domain requires German court proceedings, not a UDRP filing. A domain held by someone who genuinely sells related goods under the same name may have a legitimate interest that defeats your claim. And if you primarily want damages, only a court action reaches money – the UDRP's sole remedies are transfer or cancellation. We tell you this at Stage 1, before you spend anything.

What we need from you at this stage: the domain name in dispute, your trademark registrations (or evidence of common-law rights), any prior contact with the registrant, and the registration date of the domain relative to your mark. A WHOIS or RDAP printout of current registration data is useful; since 28 January 2025, public lookups often return redacted data, so we may need to submit a disclosure request through ICANN's Registration Data Request Service if the registrant's identity is not apparent.

If you are unsure whether your facts meet the three UDRP elements, that is exactly what the first call resolves. Contact info@cognomenlaw.com for a case assessment.

Stage 2: Evidence assembly – what decides the outcome

Evidence is the substance of a UDRP complaint. Panels receive the complaint document and the annexes; there is no oral hearing, no discovery, and generally no second round of submissions. The case you file is, in almost all situations, the case you get a decision on.

For the first element – confusing similarity – you provide the trademark certificate or, for common-law rights, use evidence predating the domain registration. We draft the analysis; you supply the underlying documents.

For the second element – no legitimate interest – we build the negative case from publicly available evidence: the content the domain resolves to, any prior offers to sell, pay-per-click or parking pages exploiting your mark, and the absence of any trade name or brand that corresponds to the domain.

For the third element – bad faith registration and use – this is where cases are won or lost. Panels look for indicators enumerated in Paragraph 4(b) of the UDRP: registration primarily to sell to the mark owner; registration to disrupt a competitor; intentional attraction of users for commercial gain by confusion; a pattern of abusive registrations across multiple domains. Passive holding of a domain – simply parking it without active use – can still constitute bad faith in the right circumstances. We identify which indicators apply to your facts and make them explicit in the complaint.

What we need from you at this stage: dated screenshots of the domain's content (taken by you as soon as possible after discovery – screenshots age well as evidence); any communication from the registrant; records of your trademark registrations or applications with dates; and any prior business or consumer confusion caused by the domain.

Stage 3: Forum selection – WIPO, the Forum, or another provider?

Four accredited providers handle UDRP complaints: WIPO, the Forum, the Czech Arbitration Court (CAC), and ADNDRC. WIPO and the Forum together account for roughly 97% of all UDRP proceedings, and for most complainants the practical choice is between those two.

The filing fee at WIPO starts at USD 1,500 for one to five domains under a single-member panel, rising to USD 4,000 for a three-member panel. The Forum's entry point is approximately USD 1,300 for one to two domains. CAC charges less – in the USD 500 – 800 range – but is rarely used outside specialist situations. Since 9 March 2026, WIPO also offers an expedited procedure delivering a decision in about one month, for a fee of USD 4,000 on single-panelist cases of up to five domains; that is worth considering when the domain is actively diverting traffic or revenue.

The choice is also a legal judgment. Certain types of complainant benefit from WIPO's institutional record with multi-domain consolidated filings. Others prefer the Forum's established procedural efficiency. We advise on this based on your portfolio and facts – there is no single correct answer.

For zones outside the standard gTLDs, the forum selection question is different. The Nominet DRS governs .uk domains and, since 7 July 2026, is administered by the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center. The ADR.eu platform at the Czech Arbitration Court administers .eu disputes. A .de dispute has no UDRP equivalent and moves through the German courts, with a DENIC DISPUTE entry available to block transfer while litigation proceeds. We identify the correct procedure for your zone before any filing.

How are costs structured?

Forum filing fees and legal fees are always presented separately at COGNOMEN. The forum filing fee goes to the provider – WIPO, the Forum, or another – and is determined by the number of domains and the panel size you choose. Our legal fee covers everything else: case assessment, evidence review, complaint drafting, communication with the provider, and post-decision implementation support.

Our indicative legal fee for a turnkey UDRP recovery is USD 2,500 – 4,000, set after the case assessment. For WIPO's expedited procedure, a rush component is added to that range. For a respondent defense or an RDNH filing, our fee starts at USD 3,500 or runs hourly. For ccTLD disputes, costs vary by zone – Nominet DRS expert fees run at GBP 750 + VAT for a full decision. All figures are indicative; the exact cost is confirmed after assessment, and no outcome is guaranteed.

The fee scales above are published on our fees page and are the only figures that represent COGNOMEN's charges. Every quote is indicative, not a binding offer.

Stages 4 and 5: Filing the complaint and the response window

Once evidence is assembled and the forum is selected, we draft the complaint. A UDRP complaint sets out the three elements in sequence, annexes the evidence, and is submitted through the provider's online portal. Filing initiates a formal compliance review by the provider before the case formally commences.

After formal commencement, the registrant has 20 days to file a response. This window is fixed by the Rules; neither party can shorten it. During those 20 days the registrar typically locks the domain – it cannot be transferred or deleted. If the registrant does not respond, the panel decides on the complaint alone, which often (though not always) favors the complainant where the evidence is clear.

If the registrant does respond, the panel has the full record before it. Supplemental filings – additional rounds of argument – are generally not permitted unless the panel invites them, which it rarely does. The case you file at the outset is the case that matters. That is why Stage 2 (evidence assembly) is where we invest the most time.

What we need from you at this stage: sign-off on the draft complaint, confirmation that the named trademark registrations are still in force, and any late-breaking evidence of registrant conduct that arose after our initial review.

If you have already received a UDRP complaint as a respondent, the 20-day window begins on the date of formal commencement. Contact info@cognomenlaw.com to discuss defense strategy and whether an RDNH finding is warranted.

Stage 6: The panel decision

After the response period closes, the provider appoints a panelist – or, if a three-member panel was requested, three panelists. The panel reviews the written record and issues a decision, typically within two to three weeks of appointment for a standard single-panelist case. A standard case from filing to decision runs about two months in total.

The decision grants transfer, cancellation, or denial. Panels may also find Reverse Domain Name Hijacking (RDNH) – a finding that the complainant brought the case in bad faith to deprive a legitimate registrant. RDNH carries no monetary penalty, but it is a public reputational finding and a record on the provider's published decision list. We take the risk of an RDNH finding seriously at the assessment stage and do not file complaints where the facts are not there.

Decisions are published on the provider's website. There is no appeal within the UDRP system, though a losing respondent may seek court review in a jurisdiction of mutual submission. The WIPO review published in December 2025 recommended exploring an appeals layer as a future development – that recommendation is under consideration and has not been adopted.

Stage 7: Registrar implementation – from decision to transfer

A transfer order does not move the domain automatically. After the decision is issued, the provider notifies the registrar and the parties. A 10-business-day waiting period then runs, during which the respondent may file a lawsuit to stay implementation. If no court order is received within that window, the registrar implements the transfer to the complainant.

In practice, implementation is straightforward in the large majority of cases. We monitor the implementation window, confirm the transfer with the registrar, and advise you on immediate post-transfer steps: updating WHOIS data, pointing the domain to your infrastructure, and considering whether a brand-protection monitoring service would catch similar registrations early. A domain recovered through litigation-equivalent effort deserves a watching brief afterward.

What we need from you at this stage: a receiving registrar account ready to accept the inbound transfer, and prompt communication if a court filing by the respondent comes to your attention.

What COGNOMEN handles, and what we need from you – a summary

Across all seven stages, the division is consistent. We handle the legal analysis, the drafting, the forum communications, the procedural deadlines, and the post-decision implementation. You supply the underlying facts: trademark records, domain discovery evidence, prior communications, and sign-off at key decision points.

Our practice focuses exclusively on domain-name disputes. We regularly advise brand owners who discover cybersquatting months or years after registration, registrants who receive complaints about domains they have held legitimately for years, and portfolio holders managing dozens of names across multiple zones. In a recent matter – a .com cybersquatting complaint involving a brand in the financial services sector, summer 2026 – we assembled the bad-faith evidence record and secured a transfer order within the standard two-month window. In another matter that same season, we successfully defended a registrant against an abusive complaint and obtained an RDNH finding, where the complainant had filed despite knowing the registrant had used the name commercially for years.

COGNOMEN is an independent boutique focused exclusively on domain-name disputes. We recover, defend, and transact internet domains across generic and country-code zones – before WIPO, the Forum, CAC, ADNDRC, and national procedures, and in court where arbitration cannot reach. We act for brand owners, domain investors, and registrants, including respondent-side defense and reverse domain name hijacking. To discuss a domain dispute, contact info@cognomenlaw.com.

Related at COGNOMEN

• udrp recovery – the full UDRP recovery service for gTLD complainants worldwide
• When NOT to file a UDRP: cases that should not be brought – identifies fact patterns where the UDRP will likely fail or backfire
• recover domain udrp group – consolidated UDRP filings covering multiple domains against one registrant

Author: Cordelia Roe — UDRP complainant practice & gTLD recovery; domain transactions and brand protection. Meet the team.

Speak with Cognomen Law

For a scoped view of your domain matter, contact info@cognomenlaw.com. Discuss your matter

Domain in disputeYour sideI want to recover a nameI received a complaint — I need a defensePortfolio / brand protectionWhat happenedEmailI agree to the processing of my enquiry as described in the privacy policy.Assess my case

No obligation. Confidential. We reply within two hours in business hours.

This publication is general information and does not constitute legal advice. For advice on your situation, contact info@cognomenlaw.com.