P&G/Sassoon suit
This article was originally published in The Rose Sheet
Executive Summary
Los Angeles federal judge denies defendant Procter & Gamble's motion for summary judgment to block case against the firm by hairstylist Vidal Sassoon Aug. 6. Trial could begin in October, according to Sassoon, which alleges breach of implied covenant and fiduciary duty by P&G. Rejection marks the second time the judge denied P&G's motion to dismiss (1"The Rose Sheet" Oct. 27, 2003, In Brief). Court determines Sassoon "presented sufficient evidence of P&G's bad faith...and should be allowed to present his evidence to a jury." Opinion also notes Sassoon has submitted evidence suggesting the consumer products giant favored its Pantene brand over Vidal Sassoon due to the line's higher profit margin. Sassoon filed the lawsuit in April 2003, seeking hundreds of millions of dollars in damages and termination of a licensing agreement with P&G (2"The Rose Sheet" April 7, 2003, p. 6). P&G has discontinued the Vidal Sassoon hair care brand in the U.S...