Litigation, Indemnities and Guarantees	9 Months Ended
Jul. 31, 2015
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Litigation, Indemnities and Guarantees	Litigation, Indemnities and Guarantees In April 2015, two putative securities class action complaints were filed against the Company and two of its former officers in the United States District Court for the Central District of California under the following captions: Leiland Stevens, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. Quiksilver, Inc., et al. and Shiva Stein, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. Quiksilver, Inc., et al. On June 26, 2015, the court consolidated these lawsuits and named Babulal Parmar as the lead plaintiff. On August 25, 2015, lead plaintiff filed an amended complaint in the consolidated action. The amended complaint asserts claims for violation of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. The putative class period in this action is from June 6, 2014 through March 26, 2015. The complaint seeks designation of this action as a class action, an award of unspecified compensatory damages, interest, costs and expenses, including attorneys’ fees and expert fees, and such other relief as the court deems appropriate. The Company cannot predict the outcome of this matter or estimate the potential impact on its results of operations, financial position or cash flows. The Company has not recorded a liability for this matter. On June 2, 2015, a shareholder derivative complaint was filed against present and former members of the Company’s Board of Directors and former officers in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Orange, under the following caption: An H. Vu, Derivatively on Behalf of Quiksilver, Inc. v. Andrew P. Mooney, et al., Defendants, and Quiksilver, Inc., Nominal Defendant. The complaint asserts claims for breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment and gross mismanagement against the individual defendants. The complaint seeks a declaration that plaintiff may maintain the action on behalf of the Company, declaratory relief, unspecified compensatory and exemplary damages, restitution, disgorgement of all profits, benefits and other compensation obtained by the individual defendants, an order directing the Company and the individual defendants to take actions to reform and improve the Company's corporate governance and internal procedures, and all appropriate equitable and/or injunctive relief. The Company cannot predict the outcome of this matter or estimate the potential impact on its results of operations, financial position or cash flows. The Company has not recorded a liability for this matter. On September 9, 2015, Quiksilver and each of its wholly owned U.S. subsidiaries filed voluntary petitions in Bankruptcy Court seeking relief under the provisions of chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code. The Debtors intend to continue to operate their business as “debtors-in-possession” under the jurisdiction of the Bankruptcy Court and in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Bankruptcy Code and orders of the Bankruptcy Court. As a result of the filings, attempts to collect, secure, or enforce remedies with respect to pre-petition claims against the Company are subject to the automatic stay provisions of section 362 of the Bankruptcy Code, and absent further order of the Bankruptcy Court, no party, subject to certain exceptions, may take any action, also subject to certain exceptions, to recover on pre-petition claims against the Debtors. At this time, it is not possible to predict the outcome of the Bankruptcy Cases or their effect on the Company's business. In addition to the foregoing, as part of its global operations, the Company may be involved in legal claims involving trademarks, intellectual property, licensing, employment matters, compliance, contracts and other matters incidental to its business. The Company believes the resolution of any such matter, individually and in aggregate, currently threatened or pending will not have a material adverse effect on its financial condition, results of operations or liquidity. During its normal course of business, the Company has made certain indemnities, commitments and guarantees under which it may be required to make payments in relation to certain transactions. These include (i) intellectual property indemnities to the Company’s customers and licensees in connection with the use, sale and/or license of the Company’s products, (ii) indemnities to various lessors in connection with facility leases for certain claims arising from such facilities or leases, (iii) indemnities to vendors and service providers pertaining to claims based on the negligence or willful misconduct of the Company, and (iv) indemnities involving the accuracy of representations and warranties in certain contracts. The duration of these indemnities, commitments and guarantees varies and, in certain cases, may be indefinite. The majority of these indemnities, commitments and guarantees do not provide for any limitation of the maximum potential for future payments the Company could be obligated to make. The Company cannot determine a range of estimated future payments and has not recorded any liability for these indemnities, commitments and guarantees in the accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheets.

Litigation, Indemnities and Guarantees

In April 2015, two putative securities class action complaints were filed against the Company and two of its former officers in the United States District Court for the Central District of California under the following captions: Leiland Stevens, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. Quiksilver, Inc., et al. and Shiva Stein, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. Quiksilver, Inc., et al. On June 26, 2015, the court consolidated these lawsuits and named Babulal Parmar as the lead plaintiff. On August 25, 2015, lead plaintiff filed an amended complaint in the consolidated action. The amended complaint asserts claims for violation of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. The putative class period in this action is from June 6, 2014 through March 26, 2015. The complaint seeks designation of this action as a class action, an award of unspecified compensatory damages, interest, costs and expenses, including attorneys’ fees and expert fees, and such other relief as the court deems appropriate. The Company cannot predict the outcome of this matter or estimate the potential impact on its results of operations, financial position or cash flows. The Company has not recorded a liability for this matter.

On June 2, 2015, a shareholder derivative complaint was filed against present and former members of the Company’s Board of Directors and former officers in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Orange, under the following caption: An H. Vu, Derivatively on Behalf of Quiksilver, Inc. v. Andrew P. Mooney, et al., Defendants, and Quiksilver, Inc., Nominal Defendant. The complaint asserts claims for breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment and gross mismanagement against the individual defendants. The complaint seeks a declaration that plaintiff may maintain the action on behalf of the Company, declaratory relief, unspecified compensatory and exemplary damages, restitution, disgorgement of all profits, benefits and other compensation obtained by the individual defendants, an order directing the Company and the individual defendants to take actions to reform and improve the Company's corporate governance and internal procedures, and all appropriate equitable and/or injunctive relief. The Company cannot predict the outcome of this matter or estimate the potential impact on its results of operations, financial position or cash flows. The Company has not recorded a liability for this matter.

On September 9, 2015, Quiksilver and each of its wholly owned U.S. subsidiaries filed voluntary petitions in Bankruptcy Court seeking relief under the provisions of chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code. The Debtors intend to continue to operate their business as “debtors-in-possession” under the jurisdiction of the Bankruptcy Court and in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Bankruptcy Code and orders of the Bankruptcy Court. As a result of the filings, attempts to collect, secure, or enforce remedies with respect to pre-petition claims against the Company are subject to the automatic stay provisions of section 362 of the Bankruptcy Code, and absent further order of the Bankruptcy Court, no party, subject to certain exceptions, may take any action, also subject to certain exceptions, to recover on pre-petition claims against the Debtors. At this time, it is not possible to predict the outcome of the Bankruptcy Cases or their effect on the Company's business.

In addition to the foregoing, as part of its global operations, the Company may be involved in legal claims involving trademarks, intellectual property, licensing, employment matters, compliance, contracts and other matters incidental to its business. The Company believes the resolution of any such matter, individually and in aggregate, currently threatened or pending will not have a material adverse effect on its financial condition, results of operations or liquidity.

During its normal course of business, the Company has made certain indemnities, commitments and guarantees under which it may be required to make payments in relation to certain transactions. These include (i) intellectual property indemnities to the Company’s customers and licensees in connection with the use, sale and/or license of the Company’s products, (ii) indemnities to various lessors in connection with facility leases for certain claims arising from such facilities or leases, (iii) indemnities to vendors and service providers pertaining to claims based on the negligence or willful misconduct of the Company, and (iv) indemnities involving the accuracy of representations and warranties in certain contracts. The duration of these indemnities, commitments and guarantees varies and, in certain cases, may be indefinite. The majority of these indemnities, commitments and guarantees do not provide for any limitation of the maximum potential for future payments the Company could be obligated to make. The Company cannot determine a range of estimated future payments and has not recorded any liability for these indemnities, commitments and guarantees in the accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheets.