Mitsubishi v. KarMART Mitsubishi: A Legal Battle Over Trademarks And Service Departments
Recently, Mitsubishi Motors North America filed a lawsuit against KarMART Mitsubishi in Burlington, Washington, for trademark violations and breach of contract. This case serves as an important reminder for dealerships to stay vigilant about notices they receive from their manufacturers alleging wrongdoing, including violations of the dealer agreement or image and branding standards.
Understanding the Allegations:
Mitsubishi alleges that KarMART failed to adhere to the company’s Visual Identity Program, which sets standards for signage and image design elements for Mitsubishi dealership facilities. Additionally, Mitsubishi alleges that KarMART has violated its dealer agreement by redirecting its service customers from its Mitsubishi-approved service department to a neighboring Volkswagen dealership’s service department. Mitsubishi seeks declaratory relief that KarMART breached its franchise agreement, specific performance forcing KarMART to stop using its current signage and to reopen a “proper service facility,” a ruling that KarMART violated 15 USC 1125(a) by using Mitsubishi’s marks without authorization, and attorney’s fees under 15 U.S.C. 1117.
The Dealership Attorney’s Takeaways:
It’s crucial for dealers to understand branding and operational guidelines set forth by their franchisors as well as their rights under their dealer agreement and applicable state and federal law. Mitsubishi isn’t the first manufacturer to sue a dealer over alleged trademark violations. If you receive notice from your manufacturer of any alleged breach of your dealer agreement or violation of any signage or image requirements, don’t ignore the warnings. You should act quickly and seek legal advice from a legal professional experienced in motor vehicle franchise laws to understand your rights.