According to court filings submitted to the High Court, Shein claims that thousands of its proprietary product photos were unlawfully used on Temu’s platform. The company’s legal team described the alleged infringement as “egregious” and occurring on an “industrial scale,” arguing that images often appeared on Temu shortly after being published on Shein’s website.

Shein also alleges that Temu has acknowledged that around 90% of the disputed images, created by Shein employees, do in fact belong to the company founded in China in 2008. The contested material includes product photos of batwing-sleeve blouses, wide-leg trousers, and ruffled designs.

In response, Whaleco UK Limited, the entity linked to Temu, rejected the allegations, calling the lawsuit an attempt to “stifle legitimate competition.” Temu has also filed a counterclaim seeking damages, arguing that Shein’s actions have harmed its business operations.

Temu’s legal representatives argue that responsibility for uploaded content lies with third-party sellers on its platform, not the company itself, and that it cannot reasonably monitor every potential infringement.

Shein’s barrister, Benet Brandreth KC, told the court that Temu’s actions were aimed at gaining an “unfair advantage” and “stealing market share from an established player,” adding that the scale of the alleged copying was “astonishing,” with images sometimes slightly altered to obscure their origin.

Temu’s lawyer, Charlotte May KC, countered that Shein has conducted an “aggressive and ongoing campaign” against its competitor for years, arguing that the case is less about intellectual property protection and more about restricting competition in the ultra-fast fashion sector.

The court also heard claims that Shein’s takedown requests had led to thousands of product listings being removed from Temu’s platform.

The dispute highlights a notable irony: Shein, which has itself faced repeated accusations from independent designers over copied styles and imagery, is now taking legal action over similar allegations.

Previous reports and social media complaints have accused both companies of replicating small designers’ work and selling similar items at significantly lower prices, often undercutting independent brands.

The case is expected to last around two weeks, with a final judgment to be delivered at a later date.