Thatchers Cider Company Limited (Respondent) v Aldi Stores Limited (Appellant)

Case summary

Case ID

UKSC/2025/0044

Parties

Appellant(s)

Aldi Stores Limited

Respondent(s)

Thatchers Cider Company Limited

Issue

Did the Court of Appeal err by allowing Thatchers’ appeal and finding that Aldi infringed Thatchers’ trade mark pursuant to section 10(3) of the Trade Marks Act 1994? In particular, is Aldi correct to argue that the Court of Appeal erred by (a) creating a new wrong of mere copying; and (b) erroneously interpreting section 11(2)(b) of the 1994 Act?

Facts

Thatchers is an independent cider producer in the United Kingdom. In February 2020, Thatchers launched ‘Thatchers Cloudy Lemon Cider’ (“the Thatchers Product”). Since May 2020, Thatchers has been the proprietor of a UK registered Trade Mark in respect of this product (“the Trade Mark”). Aldi is the UK subsidiary of a German supermarket operator. Aldi has sold its own-brand cider under the brand name ‘Taurus’ since 2013. In May 2022, Aldi launched ‘Taurus Cloudy Lemon Cider’ (“the Aldi Product”). The evidence at trial showed that Aldi had chosen to ‘benchmark’ their product against Thatchers, instructing their agency that they wanted to see “a hybrid of Taurus and Thatchers”. Thatchers commenced proceedings against Aldi for infringement of the Trade Mark because of the similarities between the Trade Mark and the Aldi Product (henceforth, the use of the ‘sign’ on the Aldi Product is referred to as “the Sign”). The High Court (Intellectual Property Enterprise Court) dismissed Thatchers’ claims. Thatchers appealed to the Court of Appeal pursuant to its section 10(3) of the Trade Marks Act 1994 claim. The Court of Appeal allowed Thatchers’ appeal, finding that the degree of similarity between the Trade Mark and the Sign was greater than assessed by the High Court. The Court of Appeal held that Aldi intended the Sign to remind consumers of Thatchers’ Trade Mark to convey the message that the Aldi Product was like the Thatchers Product, only cheaper. To that extent, Aldi intended to take advantage of the reputation of the Trade Mark to assist it to sell the Aldi Product. The Court also held that Aldi did not have a defence under section 11(2)(b) of the 1994 Act. Aldi now applies for permission to appeal to the Supreme Court.

Date of issue

18 March 2025

Case origin

PTA

Back to top