Louis Vuitton Malletier v Ng Hoe Seng [2025] SGHC 122
This is the first Singapore decision by a High Court Judge on the quantum of statutory damages under the multi-factorial framework in s 31(6) of the Singapore Trade Marks Act.
Sometime in 2022, Louis Vuitton discovered an Instagram seller, Ng, selling fake LV goods and made a ‘trap purchase’.
LV issued a cease-and-desist letter to the seller. But the seller doubled down and sold fake goods using a different IG account.
He falsely claimed in his IG posts that the goods were ‘100% authentic’. He would repost IG stories/posts by his ‘customers’ to further convey the impression that these were real goods. He also ‘deployed his coterie of influencers’ to propagate the falsehood about his ‘authentic’ goods.
When LV started a suit in the High Court against him, he failed to appear in court. LV thus obtained default judgment.
In the Assessment of Damages proceedings, LV wanted to claim $2.9 million in statutory damages, i.e. $100k for each of 29 infringing acts established.
First, the Court held that the statutory limit for statutory damages under s 31(5) of the Trade Marks Act (TMA) applies to each TYPE of goods or services which counterfeit marks were used for, and not for each USE. So, the maximum here should be $900k.
Second, the Court considered the factors in s 31(6), TMA to determine the amount:
- Ng’s infringements flagrant and aggravating.
- LV is not likely to suffer significant lost sales, because knock-offs of luxury goods are usually not substitutable with genuine goods.
- Ng leveraged LV’s marks to gain traction & sell at higher prices.
- There’s a need to deter similar infringements.
- Ng was evasive and doubled down on infringing conduct, disobeying a court injunction.
In total, the Court ordered $200k in statutory damages to LV.
Straits Times report on the case here.