Oatly AB v Dairy UK Ltd

Oatly AB v Dairy UK Ltd

The mark POST MILK GENERATION does not designate the goods as 'milk' and is not used as a generic product description. The prohibition in point 5 of Annex VII is not engaged, and consumer perception confirms the mark does not claim, suggest, or imply the products are dairy products. The appeal is allowed.

Parties
Appellant: Oatly AB; Respondent: Dairy UK Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Trade Mark Invalidity, Designation of Milk Products, Retained EU Law, Consumer Perception, Marketing Standards
Intellectual Property Trade Marks EU Law Trade Mark Invalidity Designation of Milk Products Retained EU Law Consumer Perception Marketing Standards

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Oatly AB

Appellant

Dairy UK Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the use of the word 'milk' in the trade mark POST MILK GENERATION for non-dairy products contravenes section 3(4) of the Trade Marks Act 1994 and Article 78(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013
  2. 2 Whether the mark constitutes a prohibited designation under the Regulation
  3. 3 Whether consumer perception and the nature of the mark as a trade mark affect the prohibition

Ratio Decidendi

The mark POST MILK GENERATION does not designate the goods as 'milk' and is not used as a generic product description. The prohibition in point 5 of Annex VII is not engaged, and consumer perception confirms the mark does not claim, suggest, or imply the products are dairy products. The appeal is allowed.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • Declaration of invalidity under section 3(4) of the Trade Marks Act 1994 in relation to goods in classes 29, 30, and 32 is set aside.
  • Parties to agree consequential matters including costs; if not, further hearing may be arranged.