Following the high-profile story of Cuthbert the Caterpillar, back in 2021, which involved a trademark dispute between M&S and Aldi, Aldi has again found itself accused of infringing third-party trademarks. This time, the party claiming infringement was Thatchers Cider.

Whilst the Colin/Cuthbert case was ultimately settled, Aldi has ended up in court with regards to this dispute with Thatchers.

Case Background

Thatchers Cider, a well-known British cider brand, alleged that Aldi’s Taurus Cloudy Lemon Cider closely resembled Thatchers’ Cloudy Lemon Cider in both taste and appearance arguing that the product was designed to intentionally mimic their own, thereby misleading consumers and taking unfair advantage of Thatchers’ established reputation.

Initially, the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court (IPEC) dismissed Thatchers’ claims, and the High Court found in favour of Aldi, both ruling that Aldi’s product did not infringe on the trademark and was not liable for passing off. However, Thatchers appealed this decision, leading to a recent ruling by the Court of Appeal.

Outcome

The Court of Appeal found that Aldi’s use of similar packaging and branding did indeed infringe Thatchers’ trademark. The court concluded that Aldi intended to create a link in consumers’ minds between the two products, leveraging Thatchers’ reputation to boost sales of its own product. This ruling overturned the previous decision by the IPEC and provided a clear victory for Thatchers and a challenge for Aldi’s look-a-like products.

Legal and Commercial Repercussions

This ruling has several important legal and commercial implications:

• Strengthening Trademark Protections The decision reinforces the protection of trademarks against look-a-like products and sends a strong message to retailers that attempting to mimic established brands can lead to significant legal consequences.

  
  

• Impact on Retail Strategies Retailers like Aldi, known for offering low-cost alternatives to branded products, may need to reassess their strategies. This could lead to more cautious approaches in product development and marketing to avoid potential trademark infringements.
  

• Encouraging Innovation By ruling in favour of Thatchers, the court has reiterated the importance of protecting original products and innovation. This could encourage more companies to invest in developing unique products without fear of being undercut by cheaper imitations.
  

• Consumer Perception Although this may not lead to massive changes for consumers, this ruling helps ensure that they are not misled by look-a-like products. It maintains the integrity of established brands and supports informed purchasing decisions.

This case highlights the ongoing challenges in protecting intellectual property in a retail sector where look-a-like products have been a challenge for established brands and a tongue-in-cheek opportunity for challenger businesses. The Court of Appeal’s decision sets a precedent for future trademark disputes and will likely influence how brands and retailers approach product development and marketing going forward.

If you need any help with protecting or exploiting your business’ intellectual property, please get in contact with the Commercial Team and we can discuss what you may need and the options you have when it comes to your brand.