Woman sues Prada after she couldn't get champagne splashes out of her £1,000 skirt - and wins

MELBOURNE woman has successfully sued luxury fashion label Prada because champagne stains on a £971 ($1660) skirt she wore once won't clean off, reports the  Australian paper, the Herald Sun.

Catherine Whitty  spent £971 ($1,660 in Australian dollars) on the silk skirt for her 40th birthday party, but a guest dampened the night by spilling French bubbly over the Italian creation.

Ms Whitty was surprised when her drycleaner said the stains couldn't be removed, and that any liquid - including rain or splashes from washing hands - would have damaged the delicate silk.

Catherine Whitty sued Prada over a champagne-stained skirt. Picture: Stuart Walmsley Source: HeraldSun

She launched tribunal action, arguing sales staff at Prada's flagship store on Collins St knew she was buying the piece for a champagne celebration and should have warned it was unsuitable.

Ms Whitty told the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal she'd chosen the A-line skirt because it was a timeless piece that she expected to wear many times.

The frequent Prada patron said she expected the garment would be fit for "common usage" and that she would be able to remove simple stains to allow for multiple outings.

The Princes Hill physiotherapist said she'd checked the washing instructions on the skirt before purchase, and the label said "professionally dryclean".

Ms Whitty said no Prada sales assistants had advised her the fabric would be irreparably damaged if alcohol - or water - were spilt on it.

Prada retail operations manager Albin Cheng said staff had proffered the skirt based on fashion, not what would be served at the party.

He argued the stains were not a fault of the garment, but of Ms Whitty's failure to take due care while wearing it.

"This was not caused by us," Mr Cheng told Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal.

Ms Whitty's delay in taking the skirt for cleaning hadn't helped, he claimed.

The party host waited until Monday morning after the Saturday-night mishap in the belief her preferred shop was shut on Sundays.

Mr Cheng said a search of Prada's customer database revealed that four months after the party, Ms Whitty had bought another item of the same material, raising questions about whether she really did doubt its quality and wearability.

Ms Whitty told the tribunal she'd bought other silk items from Prada and was "usually a very happy customer".

Ms Whitty in the skirt at her birthday party. Source: HeraldSun

But she was highly dissatisfied at being able to wear the damaged skirt only once, and also by Prada Australia's handling of her complaint.

She said she'd spent several frustrating months trying to get the brand to respond to her concerns before launching tribunal proceedings.

Tribunal member Peter Moloney found in favour of Ms Whitty, and ordered Prada Australia refund the full £971 ($1660) to her.

Mr Moloney noted unless sold with a warning, garments were usually be expected to withstand some use and exposure to normal hazards of life such as spills or a rain shower.

For luxury authentic products & services; http://www.luxuryonlinestore.net

If you enjoyed this post, please consider sharing it, leaving a comment or subscribing to the RSS feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader.

Content thanks:HeraldSun

Christian Louboutin Fights Carmen Steffens Red Soles

Carmen Steffens style (top) and Christian Louboutin heel, as shown on the Carmen Steffens blog. Photo By Courtesy

CHRISTIAN LOUBOUTIN has accused another footwear brand — Carmen Steffens of Brazil — of selling shoes that infringed on his trademarked red soles reported WWD (12 April, 2011).

The São Paulo-based brand issued a press release Monday responding to Christian Louboutin’s allegations, made in January, saying it has “since its inception created a logo in red, called ‘rosette,’” and finds it “surprising that another brand is trying to reserve the rights to any colour.”

The statement added, “The tones are not the same, and, as catalogs dating from 1996 can prove, Carmen Steffens shoes contain soles of all colours, including red.”

Louboutin was awarded a registered trademark for its red soles in 2008 by the U.S Patent and Trademark Office, but the complaint is directed only at Carmen Steffens France and no other markets.

Meanwhile, Gabriel Spaniol, Carmen Steffens’ international development director, said in the statement, “We are ready to provide unassailable evidence that we have been using coloured soles, especially red, before Mr. Christian Louboutin popularised his.”

Photo: CamernSteffens.com

Carmen Steffens, which is sold in more than 160 namesake shops and 450 doors across South America, plans to open 25 stores in France by 2015.

Online research by Footwear News showed that even French magazine Tout Ma compared its shoes to Louboutin’s.

“The very bling-bling shoes, set with crystal or embroidered, are reminiscent of the spirit of Louboutin, especially as they display a red sole. But they are much more affordable (between 200 and 350 euros),” said the magazine article, which Carmen Steffens was touting on its blog, along with images of shoes.

Carmen Steffens’ president of U.S. operations, Mark Willingham, told FN that “Carmen Steffens France is confident in its position regarding the brand’s long-standing use of colour on the soles of some styles of Carmen Steffens shoes, including the infrequent use of various tones of red.” He pointed out that “of the 250 styles in Carmen Steffens France’s current collection, only three styles utilise red tones on their soles.”

Content Friend: MICHELLE TAY

For luxury authentic products & services; http://www.luxuryonlinestore.net

RELATED ARTICLES

» Christian Louboutin Fights Dior Over Red-Soled Shoes
» Victory for Versace in counterfeit & fake fashion ruling
» Christian Louboutin Loses Another Red Sole Lawsuit To Zara
» Target’s Mossimo Messenger knockoff Proenza Schouler PS1 bag
» Jessica Simpson copyright Infringement with Christian Louboutin
» Christian Louboutin red sole battle with Yves Saint Laurent comes to a close 


If you enjoyed this post, please consider sharing it, leaving a comment or subscribing to the RSS feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader.

Dolce & Gabbana close nine shops in protest at being "pilloried"

Domenico Dolce and Stefano Gabbana

DOLCE & GABBANA shut shops to protest public criticism.

MILAN, July 19 (Reuters) - Italian fashion designers Dolce & Gabbana closed their Milan stores for three days on Friday in protest at being "pilloried" over their convictions for tax evasion in June, which they say they will appeal.

The words "Closed for Indignation" were emblazoned in the windows of the designers' shop in an upmarket street in Milan, the city where the pair showed their first collection in 1985.

Domenico Dolce and Stefano Gabbana were given 20-month jail terms for evading taxes on royalties of about a billion euros ($1.3 billion) by selling their brand to a Luxembourg-based holding company in 2004.

Their lawyers say they are confident of overturning the convictions. The pair are unlikely to spend time in jail due to the complexity and length of the appeals process.

"We are no longer willing to suffer undeservedly the accusations of the financial police and the income revenue authority, attacks from public ministers and the media pillory we have already been subjected to for years," they said in a statement.

The pair said they would continue to pay their more than 250 employees in Milan during the temporary closure of all their nine shops in the city.

D&G Corset

Passers-by stopped to read an article displayed in the shop window that quoted a city councillor saying the city should not let the duo show their collections in communal spaces during the city's famous fashion week in September.

"We don't need to be represented by tax evaders," councillor Franco D'Alfonso was quoted as saying.

Famed for producing sexy corset dresses and bold patterns inspired by Dolce's native Sicily, the fashion house earned just under 1.5 billion euros in global revenues in 2011.

The case is one of the few high-profile tax evasion cases to come to light in Italy, where corporate tax rates are among the highest in the world.

"Taxes are going up all the time," said Marco Daddio, a tailor from Naples whose eye was caught by the unusual appearance of Dolce & Gabbana's shop window on Friday.

If you enjoyed this post, please consider sharing it, leaving a comment or subscribing to the RSS feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader.

For luxury authentic products & services; http://www.luxuryonlinestore.net/

Content Friend: Reuters

Rihanna Sues Philip Green's Topshop for £3.5m over 'Ugly' T-shirt

Rihanna at the Grammys - suing Philip Green out of 'principle' (Reuters)

RIHANNA is reportedly suing high street fashion store Topshop over T-shirts that have an "unflattering" photo of her on them (23/05/13).

Now, I have struggled to find an ugly picture of the 25-year-old singer who has been reported as suing Sir Philip Green's company for £3.5m, High Court papers filed through law firm Reed Smith in March show.

She says that not only did Topshop use her picture without her permission, the image they chose makes her look ugly - the photo shows her with her hair tied up in a bandanna.

"The base image of the first claimant (Rihanna) is of such an unflattering nature that it would not be approved," the papers say.

Rihanna also takes issue with the quality of the T-shirts, saying both the image and the product "would not have been authorised by the first claimant".

'Unflattering' Topshop t-shirt of Rihanna

In UK law, the copyright of a photograph is owned by the photographer, not the person in the picture. Topshop also said it was allowed to use the image as it was taken in a public place.

The singer is said to be irritated at these laws and is pushing ahead with the lawsuit out of principle, not vanity.

A source said: "RiRi says it's the principle. She believes they are taking advantage of artists, that it's just exploitation and what they are doing is wrong."

Reports go on to say Green offered Rihanna, who is estimated to be worth £35m, £3,500 in compensation, which she turned down.

Should Rihanna win the lawsuit, it would be a landmark case as, at present, there is no "right of publicity" law in the UK.

In the US, however, this law prevents the use of a person's image or name for advertising or trade without their written consent.

All this took place whilst Rihanna was currently promoting her own fashion line with Topshop rival River Island (view that here). Which makes me wonder how much foul play is connected to this action, as the two have vied for celebrities but speaking about the collection, she said: "I made a piece for everybody in my crew, we all have different body types and different tastes.

Rihanna for River Island

"Some are braver than others, but, you know, I think like that because that's how all the women in the world are. We're all different, we all like different things, we all have different occasions, different moods, different body types."

For luxury authentic products & services; http://www.luxuryonlinestore.net/

Dolce & Gabbana Found Guilty of Tax Evasion, Sentenced to Jail UPDATE

Domenico Dolce and Stefano Gabbana

After more than seven months on trial for tax evasion, Domenico Dolce and Stefano Gabbana have each been sentenced to one year and eight months in prison after being found guilty of tax evasion. A jury met for three hours this afternoon to discuss the legal ruling which is one of three legal procedures that will determine a final verdict. June last month and now we here from the designing duo's lawyers.

The designers had already been hit with a $440 million fine by Italy’s Tax Commission as punishment for their crimes, which stemmed from a 2008 investigation into the 2004 sale of its signature and D&G lines to Luxembourg-based holding company Gado Srl - which Italian authorities believe was a means of evading Italy's high taxes - charges that the designers have strongly denied. The designers' lawyer, Massimo Dinoia, called for the pair to be acquitted of the charges - while prosecutor Gaetano Ruta demanded that Dolce, Gabbana and company board member Cristiana Ruella should be sent to prison for two-and-a-half years.  He added that their accountant, Luciano Patelli, should be incarcerated for three years.

Judge Antonella Brambilla ruled in the case on one of two counts. They were cleared of the second count - involving the valuation of their company and the tax rate paid - at an earlier date. Although the case had been dismissed once (in 2011), and though their lawyer had requested a full acquittal in the current trial, Italian judge Antonella Brambilla saw enough merit in the case to put the designers behind bars.

Domenico Dolce and Stefano Gabbana

The designer's lawyer issued a statement soon after, as this: "With great satisfaction, we acknowledge that - for the second time - a judge of the Milan Court has reiterated once more the absolute innocence - because the allegations are untrue - of Mr Domenico Dolce and Mr Stefano Gabbana of the accusation of having unfaithfully declared their earnings (the "notorious" million dollars of Euros).

Even more so, we are satisfied about the result of this part of the verdict because, according to Italian legislation, the statute of limitations had already run out of the charge of misrepresenting income. Despite this fact, the judge felt the need to acquit them on the matter: this means that, according to the Italian law, the proof of their innocent is more than obvious.

On the other hand, as we had the chance to state during the trial, the charges were simply a paradox: the two designers were charged with not having paid taxes for an amount of money which was double of what they had actually earned.

The Court has ruled correctly to what we have always stated and has calmed all the citizens: nobody will ever be held responsible for not having paid taxes that exceed what they had actually grossed.

Frankly speaking, we were astonished that our thesis on the regularity of everyone's behaviour related to the taxes omission payment by Gado, was not accepted. In fact, the CEO of this Company together with other people including the designers, were found guilty of having contributed in a violation of the said taxes declaration omission. We will strongly appeal this part of the verdict, certain that the result will be over-turned in appeal

Domenico Dolce and Stefano Gabbana

The absolution of the designers for the declarations related to their individual earnings is at the same time blatant and dramatic, because, notwithstanding the same fact was ruled as non-existent by today's Court, the Internal Revenue Service might proceed with their operations against them, fining them for the excessive and surreal amount of money of more than 400 million Euros.

Due to the fact that the two designers do not have this kind of money - as the judge stated today, that they have never earned it - most probably the Internal Revenue Service will attack their most precious part of their patrimony, which is their shareholding in the Dolce & Gabbana Company.

We are anxious to even think of what the economic and social repercussion of this act might mean." 

Well I cannot see either of these two in stripes, and will probably want to re design the existing prison uniforms with a little more taste and could be the trendiest uniforms ever but I seriously hope it does not come to that!

If you enjoyed this post, please consider sharing it, leaving a comment or subscribing to the RSS feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader.

For luxury authentic products & services visit; http://www.luxuryonlinestore.net

John Galliano ties luxury labels in legal knots

John Galliano

GALLIANO turned up Friday 15/03/2013 at Central Saint Martins College of Art and Design in London to advise aspiring students. 

The college was quick to quash rumours that the former Christian Dior director, who was found guilty of an anti-Semitic tirade two years ago, would return to work there. "For several years, second-year students have been set a project on a theme set by John Galliano," a spokesperson said. "John Galliano does not have a teaching post at Central Saint Martins."

Dior Samourai 1947 Knot Frame Bag

The designer is suing Dior for a reported £5.2m, alleging unfair dismissal. His lawyer, Chantal Giraud-van Gaver, argues that Galliano was an employee of LVMH and not merely a subcontractor, as Dior is arguing.

Dior Samourai 1947 Woven Frame Bag 

For luxury authentic products and services; http://www.luxuryonlinestore.net

Christian Louboutin, YSL Suit Dismissed

Christian Louboutin

After 18 months of legal wrangling a Manhattan federal district court entered a final order Thursday 27 December, confirming that Christian Louboutin has no further claims against Yves Saint Laurent over red monochrome shoes and dismissing the lawsuit.

You may remember from our initial posts, Louboutin Tries To Stop Dior From Making Red-Soled Shoes(July), then our follow on story, Christian Louboutin loses round one of red sole battle with Yves Saint Laurent (August) it seemed that the drama was going to continue with neither side giving in. 

It was once presumed in our UPDATE: Christian Louboutin Sues Yves Saint Laurent(July); Yves Saint Laurent may drop the case as the bad publicity that surrounded their action to inital make this attempt did them no favours within the industry. When YSL,  a month later, dropped its claims against Louboutin it came as no great surprise.

YSL Trib Too, left, and Louboutin Bambou

Earlier a New York federal appeals court in September backed the validity of Louboutin’s red-sole trademark but said the French shoemaker would only be able to protect its mark when it comes to red-soled shoes with contrasting uppers. That decision gave YSL the right to continue selling its monochrome red pump. The luxury giants squared up again and the case moved back to a New York federal district court for further evaluation of YSL’s counterclaims.

We can now report it has finally come to an official end with Thursday’s court order merely confirms closure of the litigation between the parties.

For luxury authentic products & services; http://www.luxuryonlinestore.net


RELATED ARTICLES
» Christian Louboutin Fights Dior Over Red-Soled Shoes
» Christian Louboutin Fights Carmen Steffens Red Soles
» Victory for Versace in counterfeit & fake fashion ruling
» Christian Louboutin Loses Another Red Sole Lawsuit To Zara
» Target’s Mossimo Messenger knockoff Proenza Schouler PS1 bag
» Jessica Simpson copyright Infringement with Christian Louboutin

http://pinterest.com/delortaeagency/

Louboutin Tries To Stop Dior From Making Red-Soled Shoes

2nd fashion law suit begins! - This time Dior comes under fire as the legal fights continues......

Court papers filed on Tuesday show Louboutin got information from a private investigator who said Christian Dior was planning to launch a red-soled shoe collection next season. The PI was hired to find information on the YSL case, but instead found information about Dior. Louboutin will not press charges against Dior, and Dior denies the claims.

The case against YSL presses on, with remarks from both sides getting snippier by the second. YSL says:

“Louboutin’s trademark should have never been granted…We just don’t think that any fashion designer should be able to monopolize any color.”

While Louboutin’s team shot back and said the claim was “utter rubbish” and “unless you are living in a cave” the consumer recognizes a red sole as a Louboutin. But don’t worry, Louboutin doesn’t claim to own every red under the sun. Louboutin’s lawyer Harley Lewin said:

“We are not claiming to own every red under the sun. There’s a particular red that Christian uses on his shoes, a bright, lacquered red. We aren’t saying burgundy or orange-red, we aren’t saying pink. We don’t own any other red but that red.”

The case will be decided on Friday by New York judge Victor Marrero.

See the latest update on Louboutin's law suit with YSL

Via Getty Images / StyleBistro.com

RELATED ARTICLES

» Christian Louboutin Fights Carmen Steffens Red Soles 

» Victory for Versace in counterfeit & fake fashion ruling

» Christian Louboutin Loses Another Red Sole Lawsuit To Zara 

» Target’s Mossimo Messenger knockoff Proenza Schouler PS1 bag

» Jessica Simpson copyright Infringement with Christian Louboutin

» Christian Louboutin red sole battle with Yves Saint Laurent comes to a close