Plant-based drinks maker Oatly has lost a long-running legal battle over the use of the word “milk” in marketing after the UK Supreme Court ruled that it cannot trademark or use the slogan “Post-Milk Generation” in connection with dairy alternatives.
The case, brought by Dairy UK, focused on the question of whether the term “milk”, which is protected under EU food labeling rules still in force in the UK, can be used in a trademark for plant-based products.
On Wednesday, the UK Supreme Court upheld an earlier Court of Appeal ruling that “milk” was a reserved term that could only refer to products of animal origin. The judges said the phrase “post-dairy generation” could confuse consumers as to whether Oatly’s products were completely dairy-free or contained only a reduced proportion of dairy products.
The decision restores the original position of the UK Intellectual Property Office (UKIPO), which rejected Oatly’s 2021 trademark application.
Oatly’s general manager for the UK and Ireland, Bryan Carroll, criticized the result, calling it “a way to stifle competition” that “creates an unlevel playing field for plant-based products that solely benefits Big Dairy.”
Under the ruling, Oatly must cancel its UK trademark registration for “POST MILK GENERATION” and cannot use the term to market dairy-free alternatives. However, since the regulation only applies to food, the company is still allowed to sell existing goods such as T-shirts with the slogan.
The dispute reflects a broader regulatory framework under which certain food names, including milk, cheese, butter and yogurt, are legally reserved for products of animal origin. Although the United Kingdom has left the EU, the relevant regulation continues to be considered “assimilated law”.
Richard May, partner at law firm Osborne Clarke, said the ruling confirmed the UK’s alignment with EU standards. “The basic principle is clear: if a product is not derived from animal milk, it cannot be marketed with reserved milk names such as ‘milk’ or ‘cheese,’” he said.
Laurie Bray, senior associate and trademark attorney at Withers & Rogers, said the ruling is crucial. “It was the highest court in the land to decide once and for all whether a plant-based milk alternative could be branded as ‘milk.’ The outcome is not what Oatly had hoped for,” she said.
Bray added that the ruling could prompt Dairy UK or its European counterparts to challenge Oatly’s EU trademark registrations using similar language.
The case comes amid a growing debate across Europe over the labeling of plant-based foods. Last year, the European Parliament voted to tighten rules on the use of terms such as “oat milk” and “veggie burger,” although the measures have not yet been officially adopted.
European farming associations argue that such terms mislead consumers and dilute established product definitions. Environmental activists and manufacturers of alternative proteins, on the other hand, warn that too restrictive labeling harms innovation and sustainability goals.
For British plant brands, the Supreme Court decision is a clear signal. While factual terms such as “dairy-free” are still permitted, the use of proprietary dairy terminology in the trademark or trademark will likely face legal challenges.
The ruling marks the end of a lengthy dispute for Oatly and underscores how regulatory definitions can impact the fast-growing plant-based food and beverage market.
