Lacoste Versus Crocodile: Indian Court's Verdict On 23-Year-Old Legal Dispute

Only one alligator in Indian waters. But which one will it be?

This 23-year-old dispute between the French luxury clothing giant Lacoste and Asian clothing major Crocodile has finally concluded—unless either company decides to escalate it. What’s this tussle all about, and what’s the latest twist? We will dive in, but first, a rewind.

French tennis player René Lacoste started the fashion brand Lacoste in 1933. Since he was also popularly called "the crocodile," he decided to use the reptile facing right as the brand’s logo.

Meanwhile, in 1952, Dr. Chan Shun started a textile firm in Hong Kong, then under British rule. He claimed that his products were as tough as crocodile skin, and therefore, he also decided to use the reptile as his brand’s logo. However, his crocodile was facing left.

As both companies grew internationally and Lacoste started entering the Asian markets, a trademark and copyright war broke out, with one of the initial legal battles fought in China in the 1990s.

However, the two companies called a truce, with Crocodile agreeing to modify its logo.

In 2001, the same battle erupted in India and was fought for 23 years.

Cut to August 2024, when the Delhi High Court put an end to the dispute, restraining Crocodile International from using the Crocodile trademark.

While the court didn’t find any copyright infringement, it observed that Crocodile’s logo infringed on Lacoste’s trademark. Therefore, it restrained Crocodile International from manufacturing, selling, or advertising any products with the disputed trademark.

In his verdict, Justice Sanjeev Narula said, “The visual and conceptual parallels between the marks support a strong case for trademark infringement, underscoring the importance of protecting the distinctiveness of the Lacoste trademarks. Under Section 29(1) of the Trade Marks Act, 1958, this degree of deceptive similarity can cause confusion and deceive the average consumer and thus violates the Plaintiffs’ trademark rights,” end of quote.