Portuguese 
Spanish 
São Paulo Court of Justice Rules That Fabio Lamborghini Can Keep His Companies, But Cannot Associate Business With the Brand’s History and Prestige
The discussion about the use of the Lamborghini surname has reached the Brazilian courts again. The dispute involves businessman Fabio Lamborghini, nephew of Ferruccio Lamborghini, creator of the famous Italian sports car manufacturer.
The companies Automobili Lamborghini and Tonino Lamborghini, the current holders of the brand, have filed lawsuits against Fabio both in Italy and Brazil.
The central allegation was the improper use of the name and improper association with luxury vehicles.
-
Seniors Over 60 Can Travel for Free Across Brazil: Elderly Statute Ensures Two Free Bus Seats and 50% Discount When Full for Low-Income Passengers
-
Detran RJ starts requiring a toxicological test for those obtaining their first driver’s license in the car and motorcycle category starting June 29; see who will be affected.
-
Florida takes TikTok to court and accuses the Chinese giant ByteDance of ignoring the law that bars minors under 14, while parents and authorities demand more protection for children on social networks.
-
Chamber approves constitutional amendment reducing the age of criminal responsibility from 18 to 16 years; what now?
In Italy, the decision was favorable to Lamborghini. In Brazil, however, the case took a different path and resulted in a more complex ruling.
First Instance Ruling in Favor of Fabio Lamborghini
In the first instance, Fabio won. The judge understood that he could use his own legal name in business activities. After all, Brazilian law guarantees this right, provided there is no bad faith.
However, Lamborghini appealed. They argued that the case was not limited to the simple use of a family name, but rather the exploitation of the brand’s tradition and global reputation.
Arguments From the Italian Manufacturer
In the appeal, the company highlighted that Fabio made constant references to Ferruccio Lamborghini, his uncle. They also stated that he used images and symbols characteristic of the brand, such as the bull in an attacking position, which is widely recognized in the automotive world.
Additionally, the companies pointed out another issue. According to them, Fabio sold wines with names that referred to Lamborghini and used the association with the family’s history as a marketing tool.
The company argued that such practices constituted unfair competition and created confusion among consumers, which could directly harm the image of their products.
Defense of the Businessman
Fabio denied the accusation of usurpation. He stated that he only registered his trademarks with the National Institute of Industrial Property (INPI) and that some were still under review.
He also emphasized that, as a legitimate heir to the surname, he had the right to use it in his business.
According to him, using his own name did not constitute irregularity. Therefore, he insisted that the action was unfair and disproportionate.
Discussion on High Renown
The case rapporteur at the São Paulo Court of Justice, Judge João Batista Paula Lima, examined another relevant aspect.
According to him, while the Lamborghini brand is recognized worldwide, it does not hold “high renown” status under Brazilian law.
This means that protection is not automatic across all market segments. To obtain this privilege, the company must formally request recognition from the INPI.
If the request is accepted, special protection lasts for ten years.
As there was no granted registration in Brazil, the judge assessed that the accusations of trademark infringement lost strength.
Legitimate Use, But With Limits
Nevertheless, Paula Lima noted that there were indications of taking advantage of the family’s tradition. According to the magistrate, Fabio’s insistence on associating his business with Ferruccio’s legacy went beyond the use of his legal name and encroached on the reputation built by the Italian manufacturer.
He cited Article 18 of the Civil Code, which prohibits the use of another’s name in a commercial trademark without authorization. He also mentioned Article 195 of the Industrial Property Law, which addresses unfair competition.
Indemnity: Final Decision of the Collegiate
The collegiate body followed the rapporteur’s reasoning. Fabio’s companies will not be required to change their names, but the businessman was prohibited from linking his activities to the history of Lamborghini or the legacy of Ferruccio.
Furthermore, it was determined that he would pay R$ 30,000 in damages to the Italian companies.
Therefore, the ruling established a middle ground. Fabio can keep his registered companies, but cannot exploit the fame of the brand created by his uncle.
With information from Conjur.
