The battle goes on. In fact, the attempt to reach an out-of-court settlement between Mario Valentino and Valentino has failed. Now the lawyers of the parties, not intending to try again, are asking the Court to reach an initial decision. After that, they will understand if and how to (re) activate.
The casus belli
After 40 years of peace, in June 2019, hostilities between the two almost homonymous companies resumed. Valentino denounced Mario Valentino (and the licensee Yarch Capital) for having disregarded the “non-belligerence” agreement signed in 1979. The aim was not to generate confusion among consumers and established names and acronyms that were to distinguish the products of both brands. Valentino’s complaint came after the Milan Court ruled that Mario Valentino had put up for sale “numerous bags models in a manner not permitted under the coexistence agreement”.
The battle goes on
The lawsuit is also pending in the USA. The Fashion Law reveals that (in a report filed with the relevant District Court in California), attorneys for both brands have filed a pleading. It states that attempts to reach a settlement have not led to an out-of-court settlement. The lawyers thus believe that “a second attempt could be productive after the completion of the summary judgment briefing”. In other words, after the Tribunal has ruled without having completed a complete process.
According to the specialised newspaper itself, the stakes are quite high. In practice, it would concern the right to use the Valentino name on all “leather goods”, which represent a large chunk of revenue for both. To comply with the 1979 agreement, the branValentino brands “Valentino Garavani” (and not just “Valentino”) its leather bags and iconic Rockstud shoes.
In the image, i.mage_lab graphic processing