CARTIER INTERNATIONAL AG AND OTHERS v. DYNASTY JEWELRY (HONG KONG) LTD AND OTHERS

CARTIER INTERNATIONAL AG AND OTHERS v. DYNASTY JEWELRY (HONG KONG) LTD AND OTHERS

The court held that plaintiffs failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the defendants manufactured the infringing goods or retained undisclosed inventories or manufacturing materials; therefore no contempt for failure to deliver up or disclose suppliers was made out. However, the court found beyond reasonable doubt that the defendants failed to disclose specific recipients and related documents in breach of paragraph 2(b) of the Consent Order and paragraph 5(b) of the Consent Judgment (and consequently paragraph 6 of the Consent Judgment) in relation to certain sales/offers (notably items referred to at the Singapore fair and the 18 August 2017 Whatsapp message), and that constituted...

Citation
[2021] HKCFI 138
Parties
1st Plaintiff: Cartier International AG; 2nd Plaintiff: Van Cleef & Arpels S.A.; 3rd Plaintiff: Richemont International S.A.; 4th Plaintiff: Richemont Asia Pacific Limited; 1st Defendant: Dynasty Jewelry (Hong Kong) Limited; 2nd Defendant: Hui Siu Ling Shelly; 3rd Defendant: Wong Shung Yiu Desmond
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
19 January 2021
Case Number
HCMP704/2018
Procedural Posture
Committal Proceedings for Contempt Arising From Consent Orders in Intellectual Property Infringement Proceedings / Judgment on Contempt Liability Delivered; Further Hearing for Penalty and Consequential Orders to Be Fixed Within 4 Months
Outcome
Contempt established in part: defendants found in contempt for failure to disclose recipients and related documents in breach of paragraph 2(b) of the Consent Order and paragraph 5(b) of the Consent Judgment and non-compliance with paragraph 6 of the Consent Judgment; no contempt found for alleged manufacturing or...
Legal Topics
Delivery Up Orders, Disclosure Orders, Verification Orders, Committal for Contempt, Burden of Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt, Scope of Disclosure, Strict Construction of Court Orders
Source Language
EN
Intellectual Property Trade Marks Copyright Passing Off Contempt of Court Injunctions Civil Procedure Delivery Up Orders +6 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cartier International AG

1st Plaintiff

Van Cleef & Arpels S.A.

2nd Plaintiff

Richemont International S.A.

3rd Plaintiff

Richemont Asia Pacific Limited

4th Plaintiff

Dynasty Jewelry (Hong Kong) Limited

1st Defendant

Hui Siu Ling Shelly

2nd Defendant

Wong Shung Yiu Desmond

3rd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Committal Proceedings for Contempt Arising From Consent Orders in Intellectual Property Infringement Proceedings / Judgment on Contempt Liability Delivered; Further Hearing for Penalty and Consequential Orders to Be Fixed Within 4 Months

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether defendants complied with delivery up and disclosure/verification orders
  2. 2 Whether defendants manufactured infringing goods or procured them from a third party
  3. 3 Whether plaintiffs proved contempt beyond reasonable doubt

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that plaintiffs failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the defendants manufactured the infringing goods or retained undisclosed inventories or manufacturing materials; therefore no contempt for failure to deliver up or disclose suppliers was made out. However, the court found beyond reasonable doubt that the defendants failed to disclose specific recipients and related documents in breach of paragraph 2(b) of the Consent Order and paragraph 5(b) of the Consent Judgment (and consequently paragraph 6 of the Consent Judgment) in relation to certain sales/offers (notably items referred to at the Singapore fair and the 18 August 2017 Whatsapp message), and that constituted...

Court Disposition

Contempt established in part: defendants found in contempt for failure to disclose recipients and related documents in breach of paragraph 2(b) of the Consent Order and paragraph 5(b) of the Consent Judgment and non-compliance with paragraph 6 of the Consent Judgment; no contempt found for alleged manufacturing or...

Orders

  • Defendants found in contempt in respect of breaches of paragraph 2(b) of the Consent Order and paragraph 5(b) of the Consent Judgment (and paragraph 6 non-compliance)
  • Hearing for further submissions on appropriate penalty and any consequential orders (including costs) to be fixed; parties to attend Listing Officer to fix a date within the next 4 months