
Thatchers Cider vs Aldi
Thatchers Cider Company Limited (Claimant/Appellant) v Aldi Stores Limited (Defendant/Respondent)
Case No: CA-2024-000463
[2025] EWCA Civ 5
Judgment 20th January 2025
This case involves Thatchers Cloudy Lemon Cider which was introduced to the market in February 2020. The design of the branding is registered as a Trade Mark (no. UK00003489711) by Thatchers. The Trade Mark features prominently both on the individual cans and the cardboard four-can packaging of the product.
In May 2022 Aldi launched its own like-brand Taurus Cloudy Lemon Cider. Thatcher’s position was that the Aldi product used a design on the individual cans and cardboard four-can packaging that was too similar in design to that used by Thatchers, and registered as a Trade Mark. Thatchers stated this was done by Aldi deliberately and in an attempt to gain an unfair advantage, in that Aldi would benefit from the reputation of the Thatcher’s Trade Mark, without having to incur the same investment in marketing.
The Claim by Thatchers was that Aldi had infringed the Trade Mark under section 10(2) and (3) of the Trade Marks Act 1994, and for passing off.
The Claim was dismissed on 12th February 2024; that decision being in Aldi’s favour. Her Honour Judge Clarke found that whilst there were similarities between the Aldi design and Thatcher’s Trade Mark, this was to a low degree and that the average consumer was unlikely to be confused between the two products. HHJ Clarke found that Aldi did not have intention to copy the Trade Mark, nor had Aldi taken an unfair advantage of the Trade Mark.
Thatchers appealed against the dismissal of the Claim under section 10(3) only which seeks to prevent retailers from taking unfair advantage of a registered Trade Mark’s reputation.
The Court of Appeal has delivered its judgment on 20th January 2025, in favour of Thatchers. Lord Justice Arnold found that the design used by Aldi was more similar to the Trade Mark of Thatcher’s than HHJ Clarke had found, and used by both Thatchers and Aldi respectively, on the individual cans and the cardboard four-can packaging. LJ Arnold found that whilst Aldi may not have intended to deceive consumers as to the trade origin of the Aldi product, they did seek to remind consumers of the Trade Mark, and that the Aldi product was similar to Thatchers, only cheaper. The Court further found that the Aldi product had achieved significant sales in a short period of time without any promotion.
This Claim sparked debate as to whether brand owners are properly protected from look-a-like packaging, or whether competition and cheaper prices for consumers should be promoted. The Court of Appeal has sided with brand owners and this decision will possibly prevent retailers from riding on the coat-tails of distinct reputable branding of companies, by the production of look-a-like products.
The decision highlights that when retailers offer affordable alternatives to named brands, that they must respect established Trade Marks and prior branding of products.
This may not be the end of this matter as Aldi has indicated its intention to appeal the decision of the Court of Appeal, which may have further implications on balancing competition v protecting intellectual property rights.
If you require assistance with a Trade Mark or your intellectual property, please contact:
Drew Barrow db@vslaw.co.uk or
Michael Sandys mls@vslaw.co.uk
or you can call 01772 555176