Lifestyle Equities Cv & Anr vs Amazon Technologies & Ors, 25th February, 2025
Delhi High Court Orders Amazon to Pay ₹339.25 Crore in Damages In a landmark judgment, the Delhi High Court on February 25, 2025, held Amazon Technologies Inc. and its affiliate companies liable for wilfully and deliberately using the trademark of Beverly Hills Polo Club (BHPC), a well-known luxury fashion brand owned by Lifestyle Equities CV and Lifestyle Licensing B. V. The court held that Amazon’s private label fashion brand known as “Symbol” had employed a horse rider logo that was too similar to BHPC’s registered trademark deceptively leading customers to believe they were purchasing authentic BHPC merchandise. Such a move not only affected the reputation of BHPC as an institution but also affected the brand identity of BHPC at a crucial phase in its evolution.
Acknowledging the impact and extent of the infringement, the court imposed a penalty of ₹339.25 crore (approximately USD 38.78 million) on Amazon, along with a permanent injunction, preventing Amazon from further using any logo, mark, or design that might create confusion concerning BHPC’s branding. This landmark order marks a good development in the direction of promoting protection of intellectual property (IP) within the nation, which can present a foundation for holding ecommerce platforms liable for infringing trademarks.
This ruling protects luxury brands’ trademarks; bars misuse of goodwill. India’s Trade Marks Act, 1999 safeguards brand exclusivity.
Case Background: Beverly Hills Polo Club vs. Amazon: The Trademark Dispute
Founded in 1982, Beverly Hills Polo Club (BHPC) is recognized as the most prestigious luxury fashion and lifestyle brand specializing in highquality apparel, accessories, watches and personal care products. Since it was officially introduced in the Indian market in 2007, BHPC has built strong equity in this country with immense consumer trust and a symbol of style, elegance, and sophistication. Homes to 91 countries including India, BHPC has garnered a loyal customer base and remains a global leader in the luxury fashion segment. In May 2020, however, BHPC learned that Amazon Technologies Inc. was marketing products under its private label “Symbol” that included a logo similar to BHPC’s own registered horserider emblem.
The fact that these products were being sold at a fraction of the price confused customers into thinking they were buying real BHPC merchandise. This not only confused consumers regarding actual price but also damaged BHPC’s image and reputation as lower-priced Symbol products diluted BHPC brand’s premium image and exclusivity. However, over time, misrepresentation eroded BHPC’s brand identity, consumer trust, and generated financial losses for the company. Recognizing the potential harm to its brand, BHPC sued Amazon claiming that the company was aware of the sale of such infringing products. More specifically, BHPC argued (allegation) that Amazon was in gross violation of Sections 29 and 135 of the Trademarks Act, 1999, that protects registered brands from unauthorized use and counterfeit goods. The company said that Amazon’s conduct deceived consumers, fostered unfair competition and intentionally abused BHPC’s high-value brand reputation. Due to the international reputation and production market of BHPC, the plaintiffs had regarded Amazon’s business action as a case of trademark infringement, as the ecommerce giant has profited from the goodwill of a globally renowned brand for free.
Court Judgment and Relief Granted
After a thorough review of legal arguments, brand registrations, and market impact, the Delhi High Court ruled in favour of BHPC and granted the following reliefs: Permanent Injunction – Amazon Technologies Inc. was permanently restrained from using BHPC’s trademark or any deceptively similar mark. Monetary Damages – Amazon was ordered to pay ₹339.25 crore (USD 38.78 million), including: ₹292.70 crore (USD 33.78 million) for lost royalties due to infringing sales. ₹43.32 crore (USD 5 million) for additional advertising expenses incurred by BHPC to counteract the infringement. Litigation Costs – Amazon was required to pay ₹3.23 crore in legal fees. Payment Timeline – If Amazon fails to pay within three months, a 5% annual interest penalty will be applied. Impact of the Ruling on E-commerce and Brand Protection This ruling sets a strong precedent for trademark protection in India, particularly for e-commerce giants operating in global markets. The case highlights: Ecommerce platforms cannot claim “safe harbour” protection if they actively sell infringing goods. Luxury brands must actively monitor online marketplaces to prevent counterfeit sales. Trademark owners can seek significant financial damages for unauthorized brand usage. Ecommerce platforms must enhance due diligence and implement stricter brand verification processes.