[HERMES CASE: ANTITRUST AND EXCLUSIVITY IN THE LUXURY GOODS MARKET]

[ANTITRUST - UNFAIR COMMERCIAL PRACTICES - ABUSE OF DOMINANT POSITION - LUXURY - BRAND - EXCLUSIVITY]

🚨 Commercial practices that may constitute an abuse of a dominant position include, but are not limited to, refusal to deal, tying and discriminatory terms of sale.

⚖️ On March 19, 2024, an antitrust class action was filed against the French luxury brand Hermès in San Francisco (Northern California) regarding its ‘Birkin’ bags. The plaintiffs allege that Hermès engaged in unfair competitive practices in violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act, the California Cartwright Act and the California Business and Professions Code. According to the plaintiffs, Hermès restricted the right to purchase Birkin bags, a luxury good that emphasises the brand's exclusive image, to persons with ‘sufficient’ status, purchase profile and/or purchase history of other Hermès accessory goods (such as scarves, jewellery and belts). According to the plaintiffs, these practices risk artificially inflating the purchase price of Birkin bags and limit consumer choice.

Hermès' position in similar cases in the past was that there is a need to to control the profile of the buyers in order to prevent abusive resale, which would damage its brand image, given the particularities of luxury goods.

⚠ This case will deal with questions on the possible existence of anti-competitive cross-selling or tied selling practices. These sales practices are not in themselves prohibited. They enable costs to be reduced, with the offer of integrated products, among other benefits, giving the company a competitive advantage. Nevertheless, they may be qualified as practices restricting competition in cases of abuse of dominant position.

#antitrust #abuseofdominantposition #luxury #exclusivity #competition