The trademark battle between Iceland Foods and the Icelandic government has intensified as the UK retailer appeals a previous ruling.
- The dispute, initiated by the Icelandic government, challenges Iceland Foods’ EU trademark, registered in 2014.
- The legal proceedings have reached the General Court of the European Union in Luxembourg for a third time.
- Richard Walker, Iceland’s Executive Chairman, has publicly emphasised the significance of this case for the company.
- The retailer argues its name is inspired by ‘land of ice,’ not the country, maintaining a long-standing brand identity.
In an ongoing legal saga, Iceland Foods is appealing against a decision that removed its EU trademark protection for the word ‘Iceland’. This case has now reached the General Court of the European Union in Luxembourg, becoming the third round of proceedings in an eight-year conflict, which was originally sparked by the Icelandic government’s challenge in 2016. The core contention lies in the supermarket’s 2014 trademark acquisition, which the Icelandic government argues impedes Icelandic producers from using their national identity in product marketing.
The conflict escalated after the EU Intellectual Property Office upheld a previous ruling in December 2022. Although this does not inhibit Iceland Foods from operating within the EU, it prevents exclusive use of ‘Iceland’ within the trademark framework. This decision represents a significant blow to the UK-based retailer, which relies heavily on its branding linked to its ‘Iceland’ moniker.
Richard Walker OBE, Iceland’s Executive Chairman, offered opening statements in Luxembourg, declaring the importance of the case: ‘We have traded under the Iceland name in the UK since 1970 and today we are one of the UK’s most recognised brands with 1000 shops, 5 million customers a week and a growing international presence in over 65 countries – including many in the EU and EEA.’ His comments highlight the brand’s established legacy and international reach.
The company maintains that its trademark is based on the concept of ‘land of ice’, as opposed to the sovereign country, aiming to preserve what it views as a crucial part of its brand identity. Despite the ongoing legal challenge, Walker’s LinkedIn post reiterates the commitment to this legal pursuit, underscoring its perceived significance for the business’s future.
While the supermarket has not commented officially on the continuing legal process, it anticipates a prolonged duration before resolution. The potential implications of this case extend beyond simple branding, possibly affecting the broader landscape of intellectual property rights and transnational commerce within the EU.
The outcome of this legal battle could have lasting implications for international trademark disputes within the European Union.
