Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB [2026] UKSC 4

Oatly registered the trade mark 'POST MILK GENERATION' for oat-based food and drink products. Dairy UK challenged its validity under the Trade Marks Act 1994, arguing it violated EU Regulation 1308/2013 prohibiting dairy terms for non-dairy products. The Supreme Court dismissed Oatly's appeal, holding the mark constituted a prohibited 'designation' of milk.

Facts

Oatly AB, a Swedish company manufacturing oat-based food and drink products, registered the trade mark ‘POST MILK GENERATION’ in April 2021 for oat-based food and drink (classes 29, 30 and 32) and T-shirts (class 25). Dairy UK Ltd, the trade association for the UK dairy industry, applied for a declaration that the registration was invalid under section 3(4) of the Trade Marks Act 1994, relying on Regulation (EU) No. 1308/2013 which regulates the use of dairy terms such as ‘milk’ in marketing agricultural products.

Issues

Ground 1

What is the proper interpretation of the term ‘designation’ in Article 78(2) and Part III of Annex VII of the 2013 Regulation, and does ‘POST MILK GENERATION’ fall within the scope of Point 5 on the basis that it uses ‘milk’ as a designation?

Ground 2

Is ‘POST MILK GENERATION’ saved by the second limb of the proviso in Point 5, which exempts designations ‘clearly used to describe a characteristic quality of the product’?

Judgment

The Supreme Court unanimously dismissed Oatly’s appeal. On Ground 1, the Court rejected Oatly’s submission that ‘designation’ means the name of a product. Lord Hamblen and Lord Burrows held:

The terms ‘designation’ or ‘designations’ in Point 5 on their natural meaning, viewed in the context of Annex VII, are referring to their use in respect of a food or drink rather than the naming of it.

The Court found that ‘designation’ has a broader meaning than merely naming a product, encompassing any use of the term in relation to relevant products. The prohibition bites where the designation has been used for a relevant product, regardless of whether it serves as the product’s name.

On Ground 2, the Court held that the trade mark does not clearly describe a characteristic quality of the product:

Rather, on its face, it is focussed on describing the targeted consumers and, in particular, those younger consumers who may be said to belong to a generation for whom there are, in contrast to past generations, widespread concerns about the production and consumption of milk.

The Court noted that even if the mark referred to a milk-free characteristic, it did not do so ‘clearly’ as required by the proviso.

Implications

This judgment provides important clarification on the scope of EU-derived regulations protecting dairy terminology in the UK (now as assimilated law). The decision confirms that the prohibition on using dairy terms extends beyond merely naming products to encompass any use of such terms in marketing non-dairy products. The judgment reinforces that the purpose of these regulations is to establish fair conditions of competition, distinct from consumer protection against deception. This has significant implications for plant-based food producers in how they may market their products.

Verdict: Appeal dismissed. The trade mark ‘POST MILK GENERATION’ is invalid for oat-based food and drink products under section 3(4) of the Trade Marks Act 1994 as its use is prohibited by Point 5 of Annex VII of Regulation (EU) No. 1308/2013.

Source: Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB (UKSC/2025/0004)