38.6c New Delhi, India, Sunday, February 15, 2026
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Business

Tiffany Sues Louis Vuitton For Reneging On $16 Billion Deal

By Meghna Mishra      13 September, 2020 02:27 PM      0 Comments
Tiffany Sues Louis Vuitton

The effect of the coronavirus pandemic can be observed everywhere. A major effect of the global pandemic can be witnessed on the commercial industry and the economy. Its negative effects have also reached the luxury industry. A slump that no one foresaw has been observed in the luxury industry. After growing rapidly for almost a decade, there have been reports of revenue falling by as much as 35 percent in the current financial year. Experts have also commented that it might take a total of 2-3 years for the luxury industry to regain its revenue. Consultancy Bain predicts that by 2022-23, the luxury industry can expect a revenue gain similar to the level observed in 2019.

On Wednesday, i.e. September 9th, 2020, Tiffany & Co., a high end American based jewellery company sued LVMH, a French luxury good giant. This was a result of LVMH not being able to fulfil a USD 16 Billion deal because of two major factors The French Government and the Coronavirus Outbreak. Bernard Arnault, leader of the French luxury good firm disclosed that he faced immense pressure by the French Foreign ministry.

LVMH said in a statement that it could not complete the deal with Tiffany as it stands, citing a request from the French government on Aug. 31 to delay the deal beyond Jan. 6 because of the threat of U.S. tariffs on French goods."

As their next step, Tiffany decided to file a lawsuit that force the detail to occur, It also made accusations stating that LVMH deliberately stalled that resulted in the deal not being complete. Another reason cited by LVMH for not going through with the deal was the threat of additional US Tariffs against French Product. The French Company stated that this increase in Tariff made it very difficult, and nearly impossible for the company to meet its contractual deadlines of November to go ahead with the acquisition. 

In an English translation of the letter received by LVMH from the French government, Frances Foreign Minister ean-Yves Le Drian wrote to Arnault, I am sure that you will understand the need to take part in our countrys efforts to defend its national interests, Interestingly, the White House has not responded or given a comment on the intervention of the French Government.

The deal between the two major luxury houses was the highest bidding deal of the year, with a USD 135 per share offer. This resulted in an equity value of USD 16.2 Billion. Both companies would massively profit from the deal, making the agreement highly symbiotic in nature. Through Tiffany, LVMH would have gained a hold of the market in North America. Similarly, Tiffany, who had experienced a turbulent last few years, was expectant of entering the Chinese market with the help of its to-be parent company LVMH.

Although, Tiffany has filed a public statement denoting its intention to sue Tiffany, it has not filed antitrust approval in the European Union. The antitrust approval is mandatory under the Competition law under the European Union. 



Share this article:



Leave a feedback about this
TRENDING NEWS


TOP STORIES

resignation-on-medical-grounds-attracts-forfeiture-of-pension-service-madras-hc-full-bench
Trending Judiciary
Resignation on Medical Grounds Attracts Forfeiture of Pension Service: Madras HC Full Bench [Read Order]

Madras High Court Full Bench rules resignation on medical grounds leads to forfeiture of past service under Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, 1978.

09 February, 2026 12:16 PM
madras-hc-clarifies-section-37-of-ndps-act-not-applicable-to-acceptance-of-bond-for-appearance
Trending Judiciary
Madras HC Clarifies: Section 37 of NDPS Act Not Applicable to Acceptance of Bond for Appearance [Read Order]

Madras High Court says Section 37 NDPS Act doesn’t apply to acceptance of bond for appearance on summons, as it is distinct from grant of bail.

09 February, 2026 12:20 PM
sc-refers-matter-to-larger-bench-to-resolve-conflicting-judgments-on-third-partys-right-under-under-order-ix-rule-13-cpc
Trending Judiciary
SC Refers Matter To Larger Bench To Resolve Conflicting Judgments On Third Party’s Right Under Under Order IX Rule 13 CPC [Read Order]

Supreme Court refers the issue of third party rights under Order IX Rule 13 CPC to a larger bench to resolve conflicting judgments on ex parte decrees.

09 February, 2026 12:35 PM
bombay-sessions-court-grants-bail-in-193-crore-cyber-fraud-case-reaffirms-bail-is-rule-jail-is-exception
Trending Judiciary
Bombay Sessions Court Grants Bail in ₹1.93 Crore Cyber Fraud Case, Reaffirms ‘Bail Is Rule, Jail Is Exception’ [Read Order]

Bombay Sessions Court grants bail in ₹1.93 crore cyber fraud case, citing right to liberty as investigation is complete and accused not direct beneficiary.

09 February, 2026 04:17 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email