Hermes shoppers try again in Birkin bag antitrust lawsuit
By Mike Scarcella
Oct 14 (Reuters) -U.S. consumers suing French luxury house Hermes have revised their lawsuit once again, hoping to persuade a skeptical judge that the company is forcing buyers to spend thousands of dollars on other products before they can purchase one of its famed Birkin bags.
The three California plaintiffs filed their third complaint on Friday, adding more allegations and details after Hermes asked the federal court in San Francisco to throw out the closely watched case.
The lawsuit still claims that Hermes only gives customers with "sufficient purchase history" a chance to buy a coveted Birkin bag, which are handmade and can cost thousands of dollars.
The consumers contend Hermes is violating U.S. antitrust law by tying the purchase of other products to the ability to buy a Birkin bag. The amended lawsuit added false advertising and fraud claims.
Hermes and its sales staff “know that many of the people they induce to buy ancillary products will not in fact get a Birkin bag,” according to the lawsuit.
Hermes did not immediately respond to requests for comment. The consumers' lawyers declined to comment.
Hermes has denied any wrongdoing, telling U.S. District Judge James Donato that the claims are “far-fetched” and that the company faced intense market competition.
Donato, a former antitrust lawyer before he took the bench in 2014, was doubtful of the consumers’ claims at a hearing in September.
“Hermes can run its business any way it wants. If it chooses to make five Birkin bags a year and charge a million to them, it can do that,” Donato said. He added: “The fact that a lot of your clients may not be able to get a Birkin bag is not a Hermes antitrust problem.”
Hermes’ alleged conduct could even bolster competition, the judge suggested, by prompting shoppers to buy a rival's bag in order to avoid the need to purchase additional Hermes accessories.
“If Hermes is going to make you pay a fortune for their bag, they are leaving the ground open for every competitor to say, ‘Come on in and get our beautiful bag and you don’t have to buy $3,000 or $30,000 worth of belts,” Donato said.
The case is Tina Cavalleri et al v. Hermes International et al, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, No. 3:24-cv-01707-JD.
For plaintiffs: Joshua Haffner of Haffner Law, and Shaun Setareh of Setareh Law Group
For defendants: Christopher Yates, Belinda Lee and Ashley Bauer of Latham & Watkins
Read more:
Birkin bag shoppers suing Hermes expand their antitrust case
Hermes asks court to toss 'far-fetched' Birkin bag antitrust case
Hermes hires Latham team to fight consumers’ Birkin bag lawsuit
Reporting by Mike Scarcella
Related Assets
Latest News
Disclaimer: The XM Group entities provide execution-only service and access to our Online Trading Facility, permitting a person to view and/or use the content available on or via the website, is not intended to change or expand on this, nor does it change or expand on this. Such access and use are always subject to: (i) Terms and Conditions; (ii) Risk Warnings; and (iii) Full Disclaimer. Such content is therefore provided as no more than general information. Particularly, please be aware that the contents of our Online Trading Facility are neither a solicitation, nor an offer to enter any transactions on the financial markets. Trading on any financial market involves a significant level of risk to your capital.
All material published on our Online Trading Facility is intended for educational/informational purposes only, and does not contain – nor should it be considered as containing – financial, investment tax or trading advice and recommendations; or a record of our trading prices; or an offer of, or solicitation for, a transaction in any financial instruments; or unsolicited financial promotions to you.
Any third-party content, as well as content prepared by XM, such as: opinions, news, research, analyses, prices and other information or links to third-party sites contained on this website are provided on an “as-is” basis, as general market commentary, and do not constitute investment advice. To the extent that any content is construed as investment research, you must note and accept that the content was not intended to and has not been prepared in accordance with legal requirements designed to promote the independence of investment research and as such, it would be considered as marketing communication under the relevant laws and regulations. Please ensure that you have read and understood our Notification on Non-Independent Investment. Research and Risk Warning concerning the foregoing information, which can be accessed here.
