Louis Vuitton Malletier sues City Chain: the dramatic bits

Finally sat down to read the High Court judgment on Louis Vuitton Malletier’s suit against City Chain — working through the entire judgment was way more exciting than reading about it in the papers!

If you like lawspeak: LV sued CC for trademark infringement, in the tort of passing off, and for dilution of its well-known marks. Point is, CC infringed LV’s “Flower Quatrefoil” and “Flower Quatrefoil Diamond” (read: Monogram) trademarks with its ‘Solvil’ line of watches, and had to pay for it.

LV-CC

If all you’ve heard is “CC infringed LV’s trademark” and nothing else, here are some of the juicy details. Hong Kong-based Louis Vuitton Pacific Ltd discovered that the “Solvil” watches were sold in CC outlets in China. It then ordered checks on branches in Shanghai, Beijing, Shenzhen, Guangzhou, HK, KL, and Singapore. Trap purchases were made, followed by coordinated enforcement raids against CC outlets in China, Malaysia and SG. In Singapore, LV’s private investigators visited and purchased watches from CC outlets at Marina Square, Suntec City, Plaza Singapura, and The Central.

So the usual wrangle started in court, and one of CC’s contentions was that Perlini’s Silver, Mintmark & Co, Citigems, and even Van Cleef & Arpels had also used the Quatrefoil flower. To this, LV replied that action should be taken against them too. Ha! Had to single out this bit because it was rather amusing.

LV also sued CC in the tort of passing off: basically you sue others that copy your work, and claim money for it. To succeed in this cause, LV had to prove
(i) Goodwill;
(ii) Misrepresentation; and
(iii) Likely damage to the brand.

(i) Goodwill
In a nutshell, goodwill is the good reputation of the business that causes people to associate the product with the company. For example, we see the monogram, and we think Ah! Louis Vuitton! If we see a swoosh, we think Ah! Nike! In court, the judge agreed that LV had substantial goodwill and reputation in Singapore.

(ii) Misrepresentation
LV alleged that CC had intentionally copied the design and meant to mislead the public. The court agreed. Pity I missed the hearing; this part sounds very claws-out:

The plaintiff (LV) postulated that in a bid to improve its performance in China where its business was making a loss, the defendant deliberately designed a range of watches that were “look-alikes” with the plaintiff’s watches in order to attract middle-class young Chinese consumers who were brand-conscious and aspired to own the plaintiff’s products but might not be able to afford them yet.

(iii) Likely damage to the brand
LV’s watches ranged $4,000 – $6,000 while the “Solvil” lookalikes cost $200 — people thinking of buying LV watches were likely to be put off by the fact that cheap lookalikes existed in the market. I think we all understand where they are coming from.

So, LV won its case, which means… Damages! At least, insofar as CC doesn’t take it up to the Court of Appeal. I should think not. If they do, however, I’m definitely worming my way in to watch. This is just way too fascinating.

(Image credit: Fashionphile)

This entry was published on May 18, 2009 at 6:58 pm. It’s filed under Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. Follow any comments here with the RSS feed for this post.

6 thoughts on “Louis Vuitton Malletier sues City Chain: the dramatic bits

  1. deebot on said:

    <3ed this PFYG!!! Law made simple x)

  2. ying on said:

    someone’s been hitting her books..

  3. hah sphanx dee. i might end up doing this for a living!

  4. Parsons Boy on said:

    so much more interesting than whatever’s been happening lately in singapore. must chio me if there’s ever going to be a hearing!

  5. saythefword on said:

    it’ll cost sooo much money! AND it’ll drag itself out! you’d be in parsons by then!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: