Delhi HC Stays Rs 339 Cr Damages Order Against Amazon in Beverly Hills Polo Club Trademark Row

Delhi HC Stays Rs 339 Cr Damages Order Against Amazon in Beverly Hills Polo Club Trademark Row
X
The single judge bench had directed Amazon to pay Rs. 339.25 crore in damages and litigation costs to the plaintiff, BHPC, for trademark infringement

The Delhi High Court on Tuesday, July 1, 2025, stayed a single judge’s order that had directed Amazon Technologies to pay Rs 339.25 crore in damages to Lifestyle Equities, the owner of Beverly Hills Polo Club (BHPC), in a trademark infringement suit.

A division bench comprising Justices C Hari Shankar and Ajay Digpaul stayed the order in an appeal moved by Amazon challenging the single-judge order.

"The considerations outlined herein above make out, in our considered opinion, an exceptional case, in which it would be a complete travesty of justice to require the Appellant Amazon Tech to deposit, or secure, any part of the amount decreed by the impugned judgment, in order to maintain its appeal," the court held.

Dispute

The trademark dispute arose in 2020 after Lifestyle Equities filed a case against Amazon and other defendants, alleging that Amazon’s clothing brand ‘Symbol’ was selling products featuring a polo player on horseback logo, which was deceptively similar to the Beverly Hills Polo Club (BHPC) logo. The products were sold by Cloudtail India Pvt. Ltd. on Amazon’s website, operated by Amazon Seller Services Pvt. Ltd. (ASSPL).

On October 12, 2020, the High Court issued an interim injunction restraining Amazon and the other defendants from using the allegedly infringing logo and directed ASSPL to take down the infringing listings from its platform. However, Amazon Technologies Inc. failed to appear and was proceeded against ex parte by an order dated April 20, 2022.

Later, on September 5, 2022, Cloudtail, one of the defendants in the case, informed the Court that it was willing to accept a decree of injunction and requested that reasonable damages be awarded in favour of Lifestyle Equities. Taking note of Cloudtail’s stand, the High Court awarded Rs 4.78 lakh in damages to Lifestyle Equities.

Single Judge Ruling

In a detailed judgment passed by the high court, the single-judge bench directed Amazon Technologies Inc. to pay $38.78 million in damages to luxury brand Beverly Hills Polo Club (BHPC), owned by Lifestyle Equities, for trademark infringement.

In doing so, the single judge bench had also remarked that the expansion of e-commerce has become an irreversible reality, leading to the emergence of a new form of infringement, referred to as ‘e-infringement’.

The ruling emphasised that the Brand License and Distribution Agreement between Amazon Technologies and Cloudtail revealed Amazon’s substantial control over Cloudtail’s branding and distribution practices. The Court held that these contractual clauses undermined Amazon’s ability to distance itself from the alleged trademark infringement.

Aggrieved by the order, Amazon Technologies filed an appeal before the Division Bench, challenging the single judge’s ruling passed on February 5, 2025.

Division bench ruling

While considering the appeal, the Division Bench stated, "This is an extraordinary case, in which a suit which, at least facially, seeks damages against the Appellant Amazon Tech, quantified that ₹ 2,00,05,000/–, has been decreed against Amazon Tech for ₹ 336,02,87,000/-, apart from costs of ₹ 3,23,10,966.60, without the pleadings having been amended at any stage."

Noting that Amazon was proceeded against ex-parte and denied any opportunity to contest the damages, the Court held,"We, therefore, dispose of the present application by staying the operation of the impugned judgment dated 25 February 2025, passed by the learned Single Judge, insofar as it awards damages of ₹ 336,02,87,000/-, and costs of ₹ 3,23,10,966.60/-"

The High Court also directed Amazon to furnish an undertaking within two weeks, agreeing to comply with the impugned judgment in the event it fails in the appeal.

'Observations and findings contained in the present judgment, we clarify, are only intended to be prima facie and for the purposes of disposing of the present application. They shall not be binding on the Court while deciding the present appeal," the Bench added while parting with the case.

The case is now scheduled for further hearing on October 9, 2025.

Case Title: Amazon Technologies Inc. v. Lifestyle Equities

Read judgement here:





Tags

Next Story