The Supreme Court dismissed Lifestyle Equities’ plea, keeping the stay on Delhi High Court’s Rs 340 crore damages order against Amazon for BHPC trademark infringement. The Division Bench will continue to hear the case on merits.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court of India on Wednesday dismissed a plea filed by UK-based fashion brand Lifestyle Equities CV challenging the stay imposed by the Delhi High Court Division Bench on an order directing Amazon Technologies to pay Rs 340 crore in damages for trademark infringement.
The case, Lifestyle Equities v. Amazon Technologies Inc, has been closely followed by the legal and business community given its significant financial and commercial implications.
A Bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and KV Viswanathan heard the matter and dismissed the plea, noting that
“the reasons for dismissal would follow in a subsequent order.”
However, the Court clarified that this dismissal
“will not come in the way of Delhi High Court’s Division Bench hearing the case on merits,”
allowing the High Court proceedings to continue.
The dispute arises from a 2020 complaint filed by Lifestyle Equities alleging infringement of its Beverly Hills Polo Club (BHPC) trademark.
The company claimed that products sold under Amazon’s private label “Symbol” on Amazon.in featured logos that were deceptively similar to its registered BHPC marks. Cloudtail India, a major seller on the platform, was also named as a defendant in the suit.
In October 2020, the Delhi High Court granted an interim injunction restraining the defendants from using the allegedly infringing mark.
While Cloudtail admitted liability and disclosed sales of roughly Rs 24 lakh from such products, Amazon Technologies did not appear in court and was proceeded against ex parte.
Later, a single-judge of the Delhi High Court ruled in favor of Lifestyle Equities, holding Amazon liable for trademark infringement. The Court found that Amazon’s brand license and distribution agreement with Cloudtail allowed extensive use of Amazon’s branding and marks.
The judgment highlighted that the commercial relationship between Amazon and Cloudtail went beyond a neutral intermediary, thereby holding Amazon accountable for the infringing products sold through its platform.
The single-judge’s ruling awarded Rs 41.5 crore in damages for corrective advertising and brand rehabilitation, and Rs 292.7 crore for lost royalties, along with litigation costs. The total damages quantified for Amazon Technologies amounted to approximately Rs 340 crore.
However, on July 1 this year, a Division Bench of Justices C Hari Shankar and Ajay Digpaul stayed the single-judge order. The Bench observed that Amazon had “not been properly served summons before being proceeded against ex parte,” raising concerns about adherence to due process.
The Division Bench also pointed out that the original suit had claimed only Rs 2 crore in damages, and no amended pleadings or formal applications had been filed to justify the award of Rs 336 crore.
The Bench observed,
“At no stage of the proceedings did the plaintiffs ever claim the awarded amount of Rs 336,02,87,000.”
Further, the Bench noted that the single-judge
“had not made any specific finding on Amazon’s direct role in affixing or authorising the use of the infringing mark,”
instead relying on inferences drawn from Amazon’s market position and its agreements with Cloudtail.
This led Lifestyle Equities to appeal before the Supreme Court, which has now dismissed the plea, effectively maintaining the Division Bench’s stay on the Rs 340 crore damages order.
Lifestyle Equities was represented by Senior Advocates Mukul Rohatgi and Gaurav Pachnanda, along with Advocates Mohit Goel, Sidhant Goel, Garima Bajaj, Dipankar Mishra, KD Sharma, and Kumar Karan from Sim & San.
Amazon Technologies was represented by Senior Advocates Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Neeraj Kishan Kaul, and Arvind Nigam, along with Advocates Saikrishna Rajagopal, Sidharth Chopra, Sneha Jain, Devvrat Joshi, Angad Makkar from Sai Krishna and Associates, and Advocate Aavishkar Singhvi.
This ruling reinforces the importance of due process in high-stakes commercial disputes and highlights the courts’ careful scrutiny when dealing with large damages awards, especially in cases involving multinational corporations and intellectual property rights.
Case Title:
Lifestyle Equities v. Amazon Technologies Inc
Click Here To Read More Reports on Amazon
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
