Recently, L'Oréal (China) Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as L'Oréal) and LVMH Perfume Cosmetics (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as LVMH) made public the civil ruling on the jurisdiction over trademark infringement disputes. As regard to the dispute over trademark infringement and unfair competition between L'Oréal and LVMH, the court of appointment in Pudong New Area of Shanghai ruled L'Oréal guilty for infringement. Unsatisfied with the ruling, L'Oréal filed an appeal, which was later rejected by Shanghai Intellectual Property Court, while the original ruling was sustained. 

After examination, the Shanghai Intellectual Property Court held that in this case, LVMH claimed that L'Oréal's infringement acts mainly include: using a logo similar to the plaintiff's "ABEILLE ROYALE" trademark on its "AGE PERFECT NECTAR ROYAL" series products, which constituted trademark infringement; imitating the advertising of LVMH's "ABEILLEROYALE" series products to promote the products involved, which constitutes unfair competition; and L'Oréal's description of the composition of the goods involved contains false advertising, which constitutes unfair competition of false advertisement.

L'Oréal believes that as far as the place of infringement is concerned, the alleged infringement in this case does not belong to the "information network infringement" stipulated in Article 25 of the Interpretation of the Civil Procedure Law, even if the implementation of the infringement and the damage result are related to the network. Therefore, the defendant requested the court to revoke the original ruling and transfer the case to Putuo District People's Court of Shanghai for trial according to law.

According to the court, the evidence proves that L'Oréal has conducted the above-mentioned advertising and sold the goods involved on its Internet platforms such as official website, the Weibo platform, the WeChat official account, Tmall flagship store, JD.COM self-operated official flagship store and WeChat applet, and the above-mentioned behavior constituted information network infringement. According to the regulations, LVMH can choose to file a law suit to the court where the infringement had occurred, that is, the domicile of the infringed person. 

Because the domicile of the infringed person, namely, LVMH, is in Pudong New Area, Shanghai, according to the relevant regulations of Shanghai Higher People's Court on centralized jurisdiction of intellectual property cases in grass-roots courts, Pudong New Area People's Court has jurisdiction over intellectual property cases of first instance in Pudong New Area, so it is not improper for the original court to exercise jurisdiction over this case according to LVMH's choice.

Therefore, the court held that L'Oréal's appeal reason could not be established and did not support its appeal request.