Suit for Unauthorized Replicas of Hermes Luxury Goods Settled on Defendant's Undertaking; Court Fees Fully Refunded
In a significant ruling delivered on November 2, 2026, the Delhi High Court, presided over by Justice Vikas Mahajan, disposed of a trademark infringement suit filed by Hermes International against Eziere Technologies Private Limited. The suit pertained to unauthorized replicas and lookalikes of Hermes' iconic luxury products including BIRKIN, PICOTIN, BOLIDE bags, H ORAN sandals, ORAN Nano and RODEO bag charms, and silk ribbons.
Hermes International, a renowned French fashion house established in 1837, alleged that Eziere Technologies was dealing in infringing products that violated its registered trademarks, including the distinctive three-dimensional BIRKIN bag shape and H ORAN mark, both of which have been declared well-known trademarks by this Court in earlier judgments.
During the proceedings, the defendant acknowledged the proprietary rights of the plaintiff in the trademarks and undertook several commitments to resolve the dispute amicably. Eziere Technologies provided an affidavit dated October 31, 2026, undertaking to cease dealing in the infringing products, remove all offending listings from its website and Instagram handle, refrain from future infringements or passing off its goods as those of Hermes, and hand over the remaining stock of infringing items to the plaintiff's counsel.
On the strength of this undertaking and the plaintiff's statement that it would not press for damages, the Court decreed the suit in terms of injunctive and ancillary reliefs sought by Hermes, while the prayers for monetary damages were waived. The defendant was put on notice that breach of its undertaking would expose it to contempt proceedings.
In addition to the substantive relief, the Court addressed the procedural aspect of court fees. Since the suit was disposed of on the basis of a settlement between the parties, the plaintiff was held entitled to a full refund of the court fee under Section 16 of the Court Fees Act, 1870. The Registry was directed to issue a certificate for refund of the entire court fee through the account of the plaintiff's counsel to ensure compliance with RBI guidelines.
This judgment reaffirms the Delhi High Court's commitment to protecting intellectual property rights, particularly in the luxury goods sector, and underlines the efficacy of settlements supported by enforceable undertakings in trademark infringement cases.
Bottom Line:
Intellectual Property - Trademark infringement and passing off - Suit concerning unauthorised replicas/lookalikes of plaintiff's luxury products disposed of on basis of defendant's undertaking to cease dealing in impugned goods, remove offending listings, hand over remaining infringing stock and refrain from future infringement - Plaintiff not pressing damages - Suit decreed in terms of injunction and ancillary reliefs - Full court fee held refundable under Section 16 of Court Fees Act, 1870 as matter was disposed of on settlement.
Statutory provision(s):
Trade Marks Act, 1999 (implied), Court Fees Act, 1870 Section 16
Hermes International v. Eziere Technologies Private Limited, (Delhi) : Law Finder Doc Id # 3014571
