Quick summary: On July 8, 2026, Thailand’s Court of Appeal for Specialized Cases upheld a lower court’s ruling in favor of Luckin Coffee in its long-running trademark battle against Thai conglomerate Royal 50R Group, operator of a near-identical copycat chain often called “fake Luckin.” The appellate court confirmed Luckin’s prior rights to its name and deer logo, ordered the cancellation of 50R’s Thai trademark registrations, and upheld a compensation award that has grown to roughly THB 95 million (about $3 million) — reportedly the largest trademark damages award in Thai judicial history. Legal commentators say the case marks the first time a Thai court has formally applied the concept of trademark squatting.

A Six-Year Fight Over a Mirrored Logo

The dispute traces back to late 2021, when Chinese social media users began posting photos of “Luckin Coffee” stores in Bangkok — despite Luckin having no official presence in Thailand at the time. The Thai stores, operated by Royal 50R Group (also known as 50R), used the same name, nearly identical store design, and a deer logo almost indistinguishable from Luckin’s own. The one visible difference: 50R’s deer faced left on a white background, while Luckin’s original faces right on blue.

Luckin publicly confirmed in August 2022 that it had not authorized any stores in Thailand and said it would pursue legal action. Court records show the dispute had actually started earlier that year, when Luckin applied to register its trademark with Thailand’s IP office and discovered that 50R had already registered a similar mark back in 2019 and begun operating stores under it in December 2020.

The Case Timeline

The 2023 reversal turned on a technicality rather than the merits: Thai appellate judges found that Luckin’s Chinese entity did not hold clear title to the trademark at the time it filed suit, since the mark had only recently been transferred to it from an affiliated company. That procedural defeat is what allowed 50R to file its own THB 10 billion countersuit later that same month.

What Changed the Second Time Around

After the 2023 loss, Luckin brought in Tilleke & Gibbins, a Bangkok-based regional law firm, to rebuild the case. According to the firm’s own account of the litigation, the earlier ruling had never actually resolved the core question of who owned superior rights to the “Luckin” name and deer logo — it had turned Luckin away on a technical pleading issue instead.

The new case, filed on Luckin’s behalf, addressed that gap directly. Thailand’s Central Intellectual Property and International Trade Court (the IP & IT Court) issued a fresh judgment on February 6, 2025, this time squarely confirming Luckin’s prior and superior rig ademark registrations, change its corporate name, and stop using the “Luckin Coffee” name — in English and Chinese — along with the deer logo.

Thailand’s Court of Appeal for Specialized Cases reviewed that decision and, on July 8, 2026, upheld it in full.

A Record-Setting Damages Award

Thai courts have historically been reluctant to award large damages in trademark cases, in part because actual financial harm — lost sales, diverted customers — can be difficult to prove with precision. The Luckin ruling breaks from that pattern.

The court’s compensation formula combined a base damages award of THB 10 million with ongoing damages of THB 100,000 per day, running from the date Luckin filed its case until 50R actually stopped infringing. According to Tilleke & Gibbins, that daily penalty accrued over 856 days, adding more than THB 85 million on top of the base award. The combined total: roughly THB 95 million, or about $3 million — which the firm describes as the highest trademark damages figure ever awarded by a Thai court.

Tilleke & Gibbins says the court based that figure on the overall severity and duration of 50R’s conduct, rather than a narrow accounting of Luckin’s lost sales. That reasoning could matter well beyond this one case: it suggests Thai courts are now willing to size damages around the scope and persistence of infringing conduct, not just documented lost revenue — a standard that’s often easier for foreign brands to meet.

Why Legal Observers Call This a Landmark Case

Beyond the damages figure, lawyers tracking the case point to three precedents it sets for trademark enforcement in Thailand:

1. First formal recognition of trademark squatting. Legal commentary on the ruling describes it as the first case in which a Thai court has formally applied the concept of bad-faith trademark registration — filing a mark you know belongs to someone else, in order to block or profit from them.
2. Application of the “prior and superior rights” doctrine. The court prioritized Luckin’s earlier, genuine use and ownership of the mark over 50R’s earlier Thai registration date, reinforcing that first-to-register isn’t always first-to-win in Thailand’s courts.
3. A new benchmark for damages. The scale of the award — and the willingness to calculate it around the severity of ongoing infringement — gives future plaintiffs a stronger template for seeking meaningful compensation.

Notably, the earlier February 2025 decision was reportedly recognized separately by Thailand’s IP & IT Court itself with an Outstanding Judgment Award for 2025, an indication that Thai judicial authorities also viewed the case as unusually significant.

The Countersuit Still Looms

One thread remains unresolved. In December 2023, immediately after its appellate win, 50R Group filed its own suit against Luckin, seeking roughly THB 10 billion (an estimated $290–370 million, or several billion yuan) in damages. The group argued that Luckin’s earlier legal pressure — including demands that 50R stop using the trademark — had caused it serious financial harm and business disruption.

Thai courts formally accepted that countersuit for filing. Its outcome hasn’t been reported publicly as of this writing, and it stands as a reminder that even a decisive appellate win doesn’t necessarily close every front in a cross-border trademark dispute.

What This Means for Brands Expanding Abroad

The Luckin case has become a cautionary tale in Chinese business and legal media about the risks of delayed international trademark filing — and a hopeful one about what’s possible when a legitimate brand owner fights back with the right legal strategy. A few takeaways stand out:

• File before you expand, not after. Luckin’s core vulnerability throughout this dispute was that 50R had registered the disputed marks in Thailand years before Luckin got there. Most jurisdictions in the region, including Thailand, operate on a first-to-file basis.
• Procedural defects can sink a strong case. Luckin’s 2023 loss had nothing to do with the merits of its trademark claim — it lost because of who technically held the rights to sue at the time. Getting corporate structure and IP ownership documentation right before litigation matters as much as the underlying facts.
• Persistence and the right local counsel can reverse a loss. Luckin’s second attempt, built with regional specialist counsel, succeeded where the first did not — by reframing the case to address the substantive ownership question the first case never reached.
• Damages doesn’t have to mean provable lost sales. Thai courts, per this ruling, are willing to weigh the severity and duration of infringing conduct as its own basis for compensation.

Frequently Asked Questions

Did Luckin Coffee win its Thailand trademark case? Yes. Thailand’s Court of Appeal for Specialized Cases upheld a ruling in Luckin’s favor on July 8, 2026, confirming its prior rights to the “Luckin Coffee” name and deer logo and ordering the cancellation of 50R Group’s Thai trademark registrations.

How much did Luckin Coffee win in damages? According to Tilleke & Gibbins, the law firm that represented Luckin, the total compensation — a base award plus accrued daily damages — reached roughly THB 95 million (about $3 million), reportedly the largest trademark damages award in Thai history.

Who is Royal 50R Group? Royal 50R is a diversified Thai conglomerate active in retail, new energy, tourism, real estate, and hospitality, with reported ties to Thailand’s royal family and military-linked interests. It operated the disputed “Luckin Coffee” stores in Thailand starting in December 2020.

Is there still an active lawsuit between Luckin and 50R? Yes. In December 2023, 50R filed a separate countersuit against Luckin seeking roughly THB 10 billion in damages. Thai courts accepted the case for filing, and no public ruling has been reported as of this article’s publication.

Why did Luckin lose its first appeal in 2023? The 2023 reversal was decided on procedural grounds. Thai appellate judges found Luckin’s Chinese entity did not clearly hold trademark ownership at the time it filed its original lawsuit, due to a recent internal transfer of the mark. The case never addressed who actually had superior rights to the trademark — an issue the 2025 refiling resolved.

Sources

• Tilleke & Gibbins, “Successfully Helps Luckin Coffee Enforce its Brand in Thailand with Historic Damages in Landmark Judgment”
• Yicai Global, “China’s Luckin Coffee Wins Trademark Spat With Thailand’s Royal 50R”
• Verdict Food Service / World Coffee Portal, coverage of the February–March 2025 IP & IT Court ruling
• Lexology, coverage of the 2023 appellate reversal and 50R’s countersuit
• Luckin Coffee official Weibo statements, July 27, 2026 and March 2025