Treasury Wine Estates in court win over Chinese copycat operator

Treasury Wine successfully sues Chinese firm which breached trademarks on its Penfolds label.

Treasury Wine says its court action has been vindicated. Pic: Supplied.

Fed up with shady winemakers and dodgy promoters in China ripping off some of its most valuable wine labels, Treasury Wine Estates has successfully prosecuted an intellectual property case in the Federal Court and been awarded $375,302 in compensation from a “copycat” wine operator called Rush Rich.

Some Chinese firms are notorious for rip-offs ranging from wine to watches and from handbags to up-market fashion labels.

In this case it was found Rush Rich had infringed on trademarks for Treasury Wine’s most valuable label, Penfolds, selling knock-off wine in China to capitalise on the popularity and prestige of the Australian brand.

Treasury Wine had launched the Federal Court case in 2018 in an attempt to stop the alleged infringement of its rights by Rush Rich in Australia and in China. It argued that without such action, its brands could be significantly damaged.

“Clearly they (Rush Rich) are not working on their own, they are not the only ones, but this is the first one we are going after and there is more to come. Trust me, we are going to use a sledgehammer to sort this out, to stop this,’’ Treasury Wine chief executive Michael Clarke told The Australian at the time.

Now Mr Clarke’s action against Rush Rich has been vindicated.

Treasury Wine announced it had won its case against the “copycat operator”, with the court finding that Rush Rich had infringed Australian trademarks, including for Penfolds and the Ben Fu trademark - the latter the Chinese transliteration for Penfolds.

The court also made orders to restrain the Rush Rich companies from using the trademarks in future and to pay Treasury Wine $375,302.34 in compensation.

“This positive outcome affirms Treasury Wine’s leadership in protecting its intellectual property rights against copycat and counterfeit operators,’’ the company said.

“The company continues to invest strongly in this area through a dedicated brand protection team, which implements a comprehensive online and offline strategy and works closely with local authorities in Australia and China and partners to enforce against bad faith operators.”

The Federal Court decision also supports the recent decision of the Shanghai Pudong Court, which upheld Treasury Wine’s unfair competition claim against Rush Rich’s Chinese group entities (Rush Rich International Trading and East Bright Sunshine (Jinjiang) Import & Export, both also respondents in the Australian proceeding.

The Chinese court had made orders for Rush Rich stop its activities and to pay two million renminbi (around $426,000) in compensation to Treasury Wine.