header-logo header-logo

Living in luxury

18 June 2009 / Louisa Albertini , Nick Rose
Issue: 7374 / Categories: Features , Commercial
printer mail-detail

Nick Rose & Louisa Albertini on how prestige is transmitted to trademarks

Owners of luxury brands will welcome a recent European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruling which allows them to enforce selective distribution agreements and prevent their goods being sold in discount stores and other outlets which might damage the reputation and prestige of their trade marks.

The facts

The case (Copad SA v Christian Dior couture SA and others (Case C-59/08)) concerned a trade mark licence agreement between Christian Dior couture SA (Dior) and Société industrielle lingerie (SIL) for the manufacture and distribution of luxury corsetry goods bearing the CHRISTIAN DIOR mark. The agreement contained a selective distribution provision aimed at maintaining the repute and prestige of the CHRISTIAN DIOR mark, which prohibited SIL from selling to wholesalers, buyers’ collectives, discount stores, mail order companies, door-to-door sales companies or companies selling within private houses without prior agreement from Dior. 

SIL subsequently faced economic difficulties and asked Dior if it could market goods outside the selective distribution network. Despite Dior refusing permission,

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll