High Street powerplayer Ladakh has failed to appeal a Federal Court decision relating to a garment from its spring/summer 2009 collection.
Last year, the Federal Magistrates Court of Australia dismissed the brand’s copyright infringement action against competitor Quick Fashion.
Ladakh alleged the womenswear wholesaler, which distributes apparel under the Sweetacacia brand name, copied an elaborate butterfly pattern featured on a range of womenswear garments.
Ladakh’s garments were distributed to retailers from November 2009, while dresses featuring a similar print were delivered to Quick Fashion from manufacturers the following month.
Quick Fashion purchased these dresses from Chinese-based Allure Fashion Development, which in turn sourced the printed material from Da Shun Clothing.
While Ladakh was successful in proving its print was an original artwork, rendered on computer, and that Quick Fashion had sold dresses patterned with a copy of this work, it was unsuccessful in laying blame on its competitor.
The Federal Magistrate was not satisfied that the copying had been done, or authorised, by the Australian-based Quick Fashion. It was this decision for which Ladakh sought an appeal.
However Federal Court Judge Christopher Jessup upheld the initial ruling, finding there was not enough evidence to support Ladakh’s claim that Quick Fashion was responsible.
“Based on nothing more than a number of tangential bases for suspicion, it is unsurprising that [original] challenge achieved little traction,” he said.
Ladakh is stocked in independent boutiques, as well as Myer and Glue stores nationally.
