Sim And San – Attorneys achieves a landmark judgement Amazon for Trademark Infringement

On Tuesday, 25 February 2025, Justice Prathiba M. Singh of the Delhi High Court issued a landmark judgment against Amazon Technologies, Inc., ordering the company to pay $39 million (approximately ₹340 crore) in damages for the deliberate and wilful infringement of the well-known trademark Beverly Hills Polo Club (logo). This ruling marks one of the highest damages ever awarded in India’s intellectual property rights (IPR) case.

The court found that Amazon, through its private label “Symbol,” had engaged in activities that infringed upon the trademark owned by Lifestyle Equities, the proprietor of the Beverly Hills Polo Club brand in India.

33.78 million, with an additional 5 million awarded for increased advertising and promotional expenses incurred due to the infringement. At the prevailing exchange rate, the total damages amounted to ₹336 crore. Furthermore, the court awarded Lifestyle full litigation costs of ₹3.23 crore (approximately $375,000), bringing the total payout to nearly ₹340 crore.

The case stemmed from Amazon’s unauthorised use of a logo under its private label “Symbol,” which closely replicated the iconic ‘horse-and-polo player’ logo of Beverly Hills Polo Club. Alongside Amazon Technologies, the defendants included Cloudtail (a former subsidiary of an Amazon-held company) and Amazon Seller Services, which operates the online marketplace www.amazon.in. The court had initially granted an interim injunction in favour of Lifestyle on 12 October 2020, which was later confirmed on 20 April 2022.

During the proceedings, Cloudtail admitted to selling goods bearing the infringing logo from 2015 until July 2020, with sales amounting to approximately ₹25 lakh. While Cloudtail and Amazon Seller Services participated in the case, Amazon Technologies initially chose not to be represented by counsel, despite being part of the same corporate group. Cloudtail later paid ₹4,78,484 in damages as decreed by the court. Amazon Seller Services was removed from the case as no substantive relief was sought against them beyond compliance with takedown orders.

Lifestyle presented its case through five witnesses, including fact witnesses, market experts, and a damages expert. The court actively engaged with the evidence, questioning witnesses to assess the validity of the claims. The judgment highlighted that Amazon had sold apparel under the infringing logo at heavily discounted prices—ranging from ₹300 to ₹400—compared to the original Beverly Hills Polo Club products, which were priced between ₹2,500 and ₹4,000. This pricing strategy, the court noted, exacerbated the damage to Lifestyle’s brand and market position.

The court also emphasized the evolving nature of trademark infringement in the digital age, coining the term “e-infringement” to describe violations occurring on online platforms. This case underscores the judiciary’s willingness to address modern challenges in IPR enforcement.

Commenting on the judgment, Mr. Sidhant Goel, Senior Partner at SIM AND SAN, Attorneys At Law, who represented Lifestyle, stated, “This judgment demonstrates that Indian courts are prepared to award substantial damages when evidence is effectively presented. It sets a new benchmark in IPR disputes, surpassing the previous record of ₹217 crore in a patent infringement case.”

Mr. Mohit Goel, a Senior Partner at SIM AND SAN, added, “This ruling is a watershed moment in Indian trademark jurisprudence, positioning India as a jurisdiction that enforces rights through meaningful damage awards. The key to this success was the strategic selection of independent experts to substantiate the damages claim.”

Lifestyle was represented by Senior Advocate Mr. Gaurav Pachnanda and a team from SIM AND SAN, including Mr. Sidhant Goel, Mr. Mohit Goel, Mr. Deepankar Mishra, Mr. Abhishek Kotnala, Mr. Karmanya Dev Sharma, and Ms. Avni Sharma from Mr. Pachnanda’s chambers.

This landmark decision reinforces the importance of protecting intellectual property rights and sets a precedent for future cases involving e-commerce platforms and trademark infringement.