IN Singapore, these two fashion retail companies co-exist peacefully.

For instance, Lacoste and Crocodile's retail stores are located a few doors away from each other at the Suntec City shopping mall.

But in China, the guns are up as both parties are waging a protracted legal battle over the use of their trademarks.

The bone of contention is which of the two companies has the right to use its trademark in China. To some customers, the two trademarks look similar.

Crocodile, which started business in 1947, uses a drawing of a 'left-facing' crocodile as its trademark while Lacoste, which was formed in 1930s, has always differentiated itself by declaring that its drawing is that of a 'right-facing' alligator.

The two companies first fought their court battles in the 1960s when Lacoste entered the Asian market, but subsequently ended their dispute by signing an agreement in 1983 to co-exist peacefully worldwide.

The latest battle was started five years ago when Crocodile International took the French sportswear maker to court in China for registering a 'left-facing' trademark, saying it was too similar to the Singapore firm's trademark.

Lacoste's family heir and spokesman, Mr Philippe Lacoste, called it a defensive move even though he had no intention of using a left-facing logo for his clothing line.

In 2004, the Shanghai No 2 Intermediate People's Court ordered Lacoste to pay a nominal sum of US$1 ($1.51) and publicly apologise to Crocodile International for trying to register its competitor's trademark as its own.

But Lacoste put up an appeal with a court in Beijing and won.

Last January, the Intermediary People's Court of Beijing ruled that Crocodile could not register its trademark as it was too similar to Lacoste's.

Undeterred, Crocodile has since followed up with an appeal to the Beijing High Court.

Its legal and administration manager Lim Keng Boon told The New Paper on Sunday that the company had decided to fight the case all the way because 'we are the Crocodile brand that has established itself worldwide'.

Mr Lim acknowledged that the stakes in this battle are high because if Crocodile loses its appeal, it may have to exit China.

An industry source revealed that the China market easily accounts for more than a third of Crocodile's total sales.

Currently Crocodile pays about 50 million yuan ($10m) annually in taxes. The company employs about 17,000 people in China. They stand to lose their jobs if its operations cease.

Crocodile has also invested about US$15m ($22.7m) on the Cartelo Crocodile Building in Shanghai, which will be completed and officially open this year.

The Cartelo Crocodile Building will serve as headquarters for Crocodile's operations in north and east Asia.

The popularity of Crocodile's apparel in China is telling because once a week, busloads of Chinese tourists visit its Ubi showroom to buy the latest season's merchandise.

The operation in Singapore will continue to serve south and west Asia, added Mr Lim.

Legal battle aside, Crocodile has its sight set on younger customers by showcasing its clothes on the fashion runway, like all international fashion houses.

Mr Ang told The New Paper on Sunday that Crocodile wants to snap out of its 'uncle' image.

To accomplish that, Mr Ang revamped his design team with creative, young talents who came up with snazzier designs that appeal to younger men.

MediaCorp actor Shaun Chen was also signed on as its brand ambassador last January.

Its advertisements were given the sexy Calvin Klein treatment. Besides an aggressive advertising campaign, Crocodile has been making its presence felt by sponsoring local art, music and film shows.

Said retail specialist James Fung: 'It is evident that Crocodile has been aggressive in its advertising campaign for the past one year. Even the shop displays are more attractive.'