Woman sold counterfeit Louis Vuitton goods to private investigator, federal court finds

A federal court has found Audrey Wang in contempt after she sold a private investigator a counterfeit Louis Vuitton wallet and scarf, despite a permanent injunction barring her from selling counterfeit goods. In 2019, Louis Vuitton obtained the injunction in a trademark infringement case. Wang, also known as Ni Ni Yang and Ni Yang, and her co-defendants were ordered to pay the luxury fashion brand nearly $750,000 in damages. They had been caught selling counterfeit goods at a mall in Richmond, B.C., the city’s popular night market, a flea market in another city and online.

Louis Vuitton brought the contempt case, alleging Wang breached the order by selling and offering for sale counterfeit goods bearing its trademarks. Judge Nicholas McHaffie issued his decision earlier this month, relying largely on testimony and video evidence from licensed private investigator Rojen Nouri.

### The investigator’s purchases

On Dec. 6, 2025, Nouri went to Parker Place Mall in Richmond, one of the locations named in the 2019 judgment. McHaffie’s decision says Nouri recognized Wang from her earlier involvement in the case; Wang introduced herself as Audrey. Nouri saw bags, handbags, jewellery, scarves and shoes bearing Louis Vuitton trademarks for sale. Based on the prices and quality, which she assessed after training from Louis Vuitton on identifying genuine goods, Nouri suspected the items were counterfeit. After speaking with Wang, she bought a wallet for $112.

The court heard that a genuine Louis Vuitton wallet like the one Nouri bought would retail for more than $1,000 in Canada and would not be sold anywhere in the world for the price she paid. Nouri returned to the mall on Jan. 28, 2026, and saw several Louis Vuitton scarves for sale. Based on the quoted prices and materials, the scarves did not appear genuine, the decision says. She paid $212 for a dark-blue scarf; the court heard a genuine one would normally retail for about $700.

Wang argued that price alone did not prove the items were counterfeit and suggested they could have been inexpensive because they were second-hand. She told the court the company cannot control the resale market or set prices for second-hand goods. The judge and Louis Vuitton agreed with that general point, but McHaffie said second-hand goods would still have to be genuine to be legitimate, and the evidence clearly showed the items in question were not.

### Louis Vuitton says product details are known only to the brand

The evidence also included testimony from Checa Chong, Louis Vuitton’s senior intellectual property counsel for North America. The decision says Chong was trained to identify counterfeit goods. She described her training as continuous and ongoing, including seminars, reviews of genuine goods and common counterfeit traits, and visits to Louis Vuitton manufacturing sites.

Chong told the court that details such as stitching, logo placement and colour distinguished Wang’s wallet and scarf from genuine Louis Vuitton items. She also identified problems with the trademarked packaging and receipts, including the position of the handle on the orange paper shopping bag. McHaffie wrote that he accepted Chong’s testimony that no third party would be better qualified to determine whether the goods were genuine, since details of Louis Vuitton’s manufacturing are known only to the company.

Video evidence also showed Wang telling Nouri that one luxury item for sale in the shop was not authentic. It captured a conversation in which they compared goods Wang had for sale with items on “genuine websites,” according to the decision. McHaffie wrote that this evidence, Wang’s history of selling non-genuine luxury-branded goods, the store context and the fact that she sold goods bearing Louis Vuitton trademarks that were shown to be counterfeit left him with no doubt that she deliberately and knowingly sold counterfeit Louis Vuitton goods.

Penalties for civil contempt of court can include fines and, in some cases, incarceration. The consequences for Wang will be determined at a future hearing, but no date has been set.