Organisation: Louis Vuitton

The Beijing Number 1 Intermediate Court has ruled in favour of LVMH in a case involving an application by a Hong Kong company to register the mark LVMH. This case shows that the Chinese courts are tightening the net around trademark squatters - in the past, brand owners have encountered substantial difficulties in their fight against squatters if their marks were not recognised as well known or there was no clear evidence of bad faith.

05 March 2012

While one of the top ranked ‘luxury brands’ in China may have reacted negatively to the label, the findings of a new report make positive reading for Western companies looking to capitalise on the desire for luxury amongst the country’s affluent consumers.

24 January 2012

In <i>Louis Vuitton Malletier v OHIM</i>, the General Court has partially annulled a decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM finding that Louis Vuitton Malletier's 'locking device' mark was invalid. Among other things, the General Court held that there is no conceptual link between a locking device and an object which is not likely to include a locking device. Therefore, the mark was distinctive for certain goods, such as leather goods in Class 18.

16 January 2012