Louis Vuitton secures landmark victory in trademark infringement case
Delhi High Court rules in favour of Louis Vuitton, ordering defendants to cease counterfeit operations and compensate for litigation costs.
ADVERTISEMENT
The Delhi High Court has ruled in favour of luxury fashion house Louis Vuitton in a trademark infringement suit, as per reports.
The Single Judge Bench of Justice Amit Bansal held that the defendants, operating from Surat, Gujarat, had infringed the registered trademarks of Louis Vuitton (LV) and engaged in passing off counterfeit goods as genuine.
The court decreed the suit accordingly, granting permanent injunctions and further legal remedies to the luxury brand.
Background
The case emerged in June 2023 when Louis Vuitton discovered that defendants were selling counterfeit products bearing the iconic 'LV' marks through multi-storied stores, a godown, and online platforms.
A detailed investigation revealed a sophisticated counterfeit network involving Instagram accounts, e-commerce websites, and even a Telegram group directing customers to infringing products.
The investigation also revealed that defendants were using subdomains linked to a primary website, www.selloship.com, managed by a third defendant, to facilitate the sale of counterfeit goods.
Ex-parte proceedings and evidence
On October 5, 2023, the Court issued an ex-parte ad interim injunction, restraining the defendants from manufacturing or selling products bearing the 'LV' marks. However, the defendants failed to respond or appear in court, leading to ex-parte proceedings. The Court relied on precedent set in Satya Infrastructure Ltd. v. Satya Infra & Estates Pvt. Ltd., determining that the plaint and supporting affidavit from Louis Vuitton were sufficient evidence, eliminating the need for further trials.
Justice Bansal affirmed that Louis Vuitton had established its ownership of the well-known ‘LV’ marks and demonstrated that the defendants had engaged in trademark infringement and passing off. The defendants, the Court noted, exploited Louis Vuitton’s reputation and goodwill to deceive unwary consumers. The Court found no plausible explanation or defense from the defendants and determined that the case merited no trial.
The Court decreed the following:
a) Defendants 1 and 2 were ordered to hand over all seized counterfeit merchandise. b) Defendant 3 was directed to block all subdomains used to facilitate the sale of counterfeit goods. c) Louis Vuitton was allowed to seek reimbursement for litigation costs incurred, to be determined by the Joint Registrar.
