Oatly Loses UK Supreme Court Battle Over 'Milk' Trademark
Published 11 February 2026
Highlights
- Oatly lost a legal battle in the UK Supreme Court over using "milk" in its marketing, specifically the phrase "post-milk generation."
- The court ruled that terms like "milk" can only describe animal-derived products, aligning with EU regulations.
- Dairy UK argued that using "milk" for plant-based products could mislead consumers, a stance supported by the court.
- Oatly criticized the decision as anti-competitive, claiming it benefits the dairy industry and confuses consumers.
- The ruling may impact Oatly's trademark registrations in other European countries, potentially prompting similar challenges.
-
Rewritten Article
Oatly Loses UK Supreme Court Battle Over 'Milk' Trademark
In a landmark decision, the UK Supreme Court has ruled against Swedish company Oatly in its attempt to trademark the phrase "post-milk generation" for its plant-based products. This ruling marks the culmination of a protracted legal dispute with Dairy UK, the representative body for British dairy farmers, which argued that the term "milk" should be reserved exclusively for animal-derived products.
Legal Battle and Court Rulings
The controversy began when Oatly sought to trademark "post-milk generation" in 2021, a move opposed by Dairy UK. The UK Supreme Court's decision on Wednesday upheld previous rulings that the term "milk" could mislead consumers into thinking Oatly's products contain dairy. This aligns with EU regulations that restrict the use of dairy-related terms to animal products.
Bryan Carroll, Oatly's general manager for the UK and Ireland, expressed disappointment, stating, "This decision creates unnecessary confusion and an uneven playing field for plant-based products that solely benefits Big Dairy." Despite the setback, Oatly remains committed to promoting its plant-based alternatives.
Industry Implications
The ruling has significant implications for the plant-based industry, reinforcing the strict use of dairy terms. Judith Bryans, chief executive of Dairy UK, welcomed the decision, emphasizing its role in maintaining clarity for consumers. "It brings greater certainty for businesses and helps ensure that long-established dairy terms continue to carry clear meaning," she said.
The decision also reflects a broader trend in Europe, where similar restrictions are being considered. Last year, the EU parliament voted to ban terms like "oat milk" and "veggie burger," though these measures await further approval.
Oatly's Response and Future Plans
Despite the legal defeat, Oatly plans to continue advocating for its products. Carroll indicated that the company would explore alternative ways to engage with its community, including distributing "post-milk generation" merchandise. The ruling may also prompt challenges to Oatly's trademarks in other European countries, as similar trade bodies could follow Dairy UK's lead.
-
Scenario Analysis
The Supreme Court's ruling could set a precedent for future trademark disputes involving plant-based products in the UK and potentially across Europe. As the plant-based industry continues to grow, companies may need to navigate increasingly complex regulatory landscapes. Legal experts suggest that businesses like Oatly might focus on emphasizing factual information in their branding to avoid conflicts.
Politically, the decision underscores the influence of traditional agricultural sectors in shaping food labeling laws. This could lead to further debates on how best to balance consumer clarity with the promotion of sustainable food alternatives. As environmental concerns drive demand for plant-based options, the industry may push for regulatory changes that reflect evolving consumer preferences.
In a landmark decision, the UK Supreme Court has ruled against Swedish company Oatly in its attempt to trademark the phrase "post-milk generation" for its plant-based products. This ruling marks the culmination of a protracted legal dispute with Dairy UK, the representative body for British dairy farmers, which argued that the term "milk" should be reserved exclusively for animal-derived products.
Legal Battle and Court Rulings
The controversy began when Oatly sought to trademark "post-milk generation" in 2021, a move opposed by Dairy UK. The UK Supreme Court's decision on Wednesday upheld previous rulings that the term "milk" could mislead consumers into thinking Oatly's products contain dairy. This aligns with EU regulations that restrict the use of dairy-related terms to animal products.
Bryan Carroll, Oatly's general manager for the UK and Ireland, expressed disappointment, stating, "This decision creates unnecessary confusion and an uneven playing field for plant-based products that solely benefits Big Dairy." Despite the setback, Oatly remains committed to promoting its plant-based alternatives.
Industry Implications
The ruling has significant implications for the plant-based industry, reinforcing the strict use of dairy terms. Judith Bryans, chief executive of Dairy UK, welcomed the decision, emphasizing its role in maintaining clarity for consumers. "It brings greater certainty for businesses and helps ensure that long-established dairy terms continue to carry clear meaning," she said.
The decision also reflects a broader trend in Europe, where similar restrictions are being considered. Last year, the EU parliament voted to ban terms like "oat milk" and "veggie burger," though these measures await further approval.
Oatly's Response and Future Plans
Despite the legal defeat, Oatly plans to continue advocating for its products. Carroll indicated that the company would explore alternative ways to engage with its community, including distributing "post-milk generation" merchandise. The ruling may also prompt challenges to Oatly's trademarks in other European countries, as similar trade bodies could follow Dairy UK's lead.
What this might mean
The Supreme Court's ruling could set a precedent for future trademark disputes involving plant-based products in the UK and potentially across Europe. As the plant-based industry continues to grow, companies may need to navigate increasingly complex regulatory landscapes. Legal experts suggest that businesses like Oatly might focus on emphasizing factual information in their branding to avoid conflicts.
Politically, the decision underscores the influence of traditional agricultural sectors in shaping food labeling laws. This could lead to further debates on how best to balance consumer clarity with the promotion of sustainable food alternatives. As environmental concerns drive demand for plant-based options, the industry may push for regulatory changes that reflect evolving consumer preferences.
