Developments in a number of key retail lawsuits stood out during the first half and the second half of 2025, with one of the most closely watched coming in the form of a major courtroom victory for Hermès in a high-stakes competition law dispute over its Birkin sales practices – now headed for appeal. At the same time, courts across the U.S. continued to shape the legal contours of brand control, consumer protection, and enforcement, weighing disputes over warranty restrictions, massive counterfeiting operations, trade dress protection for iconic designs, and alleged anticompetitive conduct among ultra-fast-fashion rivals.
Parallel litigation on the corporate front kept companies like Farfetch, Tapestry, and Capri under investor scrutiny following aborted deals and alleged disclosure failures, while a landmark copyright question – over the ownership of AI-generated art – edged closer to possible Supreme Court review.
Below are some of the most significant retail lawsuits and key case developments we covered this year …
Deckers Outdoor Corp. v. Last Brand, Inc.
UGG’s efforts to claim exclusive rights in a couple of shearling-lined boot designs were dealt a blow this year, as a court sided with Quince in a closely watched case over dupes. In a decision that underscores the limits of trademark law in protecting product design, a federal judge in California found that two of UGG’s best-known styles – the Classic Ultra Mini boot and the Tasman slipper – are generic and therefore, ineligible for trade dress protection.
The ruling in October, as first reported by TFL, grants partial summary judgment in favor of Quince, a direct-to-consumer brand accused of copying the look of the popular UGG footwear.
Cavalleri, et al. v. Hermès International
A closely watched fight over Hermès’ allegedly anticompetitive system of allocating its coveted Birkin bags is heading for an appeal. In a notice filed in October, consumer plaintiffs Tina Cavalleri and Mark Glinoga, who first filed suit against Hermès back in March 2024, alerted the Northern District of California that they are looking to take their case before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in a bid to overturn the lower court’s dismissal of their claims.
Whaleco Inc. v. Shein Technology LLC
Shein sidestepped key claims waged against it by Temu, which has accused its ultra-fast fashion rival of engaging in “an intricate scheme to disrupt its business and slow its growth” in the U.S. In an order in October, a federal court in Washington, D.C. tossed out trade secret and antitrust causes of action brought by Temu, finding that Shein’s alleged efforts to lock up ultra-fast fashion suppliers did not fall within the reach of U.S. competition law and similarly, that Temu fell short in waging its trade secret misappropriations claims on the basis that such alleged wrongdoing by Shein occurred outside of the U.S.
While the court dismissed Temu’s antitrust violations, tortious interference, and abuse of process claims, it is permitting its claims for violating the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, copyright and trade dress infringement, fraud on the U.S. Copyright Office, and unfair competition to proceed.
Louis Vuitton Malletier S.A.S. v. Westgate Discount Mall, Inc.
Louis Vuitton secured an eye-watering damages award this year in its ongoing battle against counterfeits. In September a U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia judge issued a default judgment against Westgate Discount Mall Inc., an Atlanta-based indoor flea market long accused of facilitating the sale of counterfeit goods – including fake Louis Vuitton handbags, luggage, and accessories – where authorities once seized a total of eighteen tractor trailer loads of counterfeit and infringing products during a single raid.
At $584 million, the award, which was first reported by TFL, ranks among the largest for a luxury goods brand in a U.S. counterfeiting case (beaten only by a couple of judgments in Schedule A cases).
In Re Farfetch Limited Securities Litigation
The securities fraud litigation tied to Farfetch’s pre-Coupang-rescue decline continues to play out. In a bid to keep their proposed class action alive following a September 30 dismissal, a group of shareholder plaintiffs filed a second amended complaint, continuing to allege – on behalf of themselves and other investors who purchased Farfetch shares between December 2022 and December 2023 – that the company and several former executives misled the market about its financial health.
As first reported by TFL, the amended complaint lodged in November places the alleged fraud within a broader narrative of Farfetch’s liquidity deterioration and the internal decision-making that preceded its distressed restructuring.
In re: Capri Holdings Ltd. Securities Litigation
The $8.5 billion merger between Tapestry, Inc. and Capri Holdings Limited – which was touted as a transformative deal to create an American fashion conglomerate – collapsed after an antitrust challenge. While the dust may have settled on the deal, itself, both companies and their executives are facing the ramifications by way of an investor lawsuit. The fashion groups are looking to dodge liability for allegedly making materially false and misleading statements about the proposed merger, which inflated the value of Capri’s stock and then caused Capri shareholders to suffer significant losses when its stock price plunged last year.
Tapestry and Capri filed separate motions to dismiss the case in July, calling the investor plaintiffs’ claims little more than “buyer’s remorse repackaged as securities fraud.”
This is a short excerpt from TFL’s Annual Review, which was published exclusively for TFL PRO+ subscribers and dives into everything from deals that further consolidated the fashion/luxury segments over the past year to the rise in ESG-centric legislation around the world.
Inquire today about how to sign up for a PRO+ subscription and gain access to all of our content.
Share
