RUB 300 million for counterfeiting on a marketplace: the Makita case
The Arbitration Court of Moscow has recovered RUB 300 million from an Ozon seller for infringement of Makita Corporation's trademark rights.
Background of the dispute
At first glance, the situation is standard: selling goods under a brand without the rights holder's permission, a test purchase, signs of counterfeiting. But the key point in this case is not so much the fact of infringement itself, but how the claimant argued the scale of counterfeiting and the amount of compensation – and what the court agreed with.
The case began with minimal claims (RUB 300,000), then the amount increased to RUB 20 million, and later to RUB 300 million.
The crucial element was evidence gathering. At the claimant's request, the court ordered Ozon and the fiscal data operator (FDO) to provide data on the quantity of goods sold, revenue, and product range.
Importantly, the defendant did not submit a counter‑calculation and did not challenge the figures – which, in effect, locked in the final amount.
Practical takeaway
Formally, this is a RUB 300 million award. But actually recovering that amount is practically impossible: the court fee alone was about RUB 2 million (several times higher than the average compensation in such cases). Moreover, the claimant will likely struggle to recover legal costs.
In addition to almost guaranteed appeals and cassation challenges, this case will probably continue in bankruptcy proceedings – it is unlikely that the defendant will pay such compensation.
Nevertheless, the court's approach is clear: if significant marketplace turnover is confirmed, compensation can be calculated based on that turnover – and the court may award it in full.
If you encounter counterfeiting or unauthorised use of your brand on marketplaces, you can describe your situation via our bot: @magenta_contact_bot