ARTICLE
12 April 2014

The Colour Purple: Cadbury Loses Battle To Register Its Signature Purple Shade

RS
Reed Smith (Worldwide)

Contributor

Reed Smith (Worldwide) logo
Reed Smith is a dynamic international law firm helping clients move their businesses forward. By delivering smart, creative legal services, we enrich clients' experiences with us and support achievement of their business goals. Our longstanding relationships and collaborative structure enable the speedy resolution of complex disputes, transactions, and regulatory matters.
Cadbury has lost its Supreme Court battle to register as a trade mark its iconic colour purple (known as Pantone 2685C), ending a 10-year legal battle between Cadbury and its competitor Nestlé.
UK Intellectual Property
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.

Cadbury has lost its Supreme Court battle to register as a trade mark its iconic colour purple (known as Pantone 2685C), ending a 10-year legal battle between Cadbury and its competitor Nestlé. The UK Supreme Court has refused Cadbury's application to appeal against an October 2013 Court of Appeal decision which ruled in Nestlé's favour, meaning that Cadbury has now exhausted all possible avenues of appeal in the UK.

Cadbury first filed a UK trade mark application for the purple shade in 2004. The application was allowed and published in the Trade Marks Journal in 2008 but could not be registered due to opposition raised by Nestlé. This set into motion a chain of lengthy proceedings. First, the UK's Intellectual Property Office (IPO) dismissed Nestlé's claims that the colour was not distinctive to Cadbury. Nestlé then took the case to the High Court. Despite limiting the category of goods covered by the trade mark application to milk chocolate only, the High Court dismissed Nestlé's claim on the basis that Cadbury was able to show that that mark had acquired a distinctive character over the 100 years it had been using the shade.

Nestlé continued the case to the Court of Appeal where ruling was finally made in its favour. The Court of Appeal considered that Cadbury's application for registration did not sufficiently define its rights to the colour and that the application amounted to an attempt to register 'multiple signs'. Cadbury filed an application to the Supreme Court to appeal the Court of Appeal's ruling but the court determined that Cadbury's application to appeal did not raise an arguable point of law and would give an unfair competitive advantage to Cadbury without the required clarity, objectivity and precision needed for a trade mark.

Cadbury has confirmed that there are no further avenues for appeal but this is certainly not the end of Cadbury's efforts to protect its brand. Cadbury may choose to file new trade mark applications which more clearly define Cadbury's alleged rights to the colour purple in order to overcome the Court of Appeal's concerns about Cadbury's original imprecise definition of rights. Aside from formal trade mark registration, Cadbury may still be able to rely on the common law principle of 'passing off' to stop competitors from using the colour purple when applied to the packaging of milk chocolate products. 

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See More Popular Content From

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More