Iceland Foods has once again found itself embroiled in a legal battle over its trademark on the word ‘Iceland’, as it seeks to overturn a European Union decision that revoked its rights. This significant development marks the third phase in an ongoing dispute with the Icelandic government.
Executive chairman of Iceland Foods, Richard Walker OBE, recently took the stage at the General Court of The European Union in Luxembourg to assert his company’s stance on the matter. The legal proceedings, initiated by a challenge from the Icelandic government in 2016, contest the retailer’s exclusive use of the term ‘Iceland’ within the European Union.
The conflict traces back to Iceland Foods’ acquisition of the trademark in 2014, which subsequently drew opposition from the Icelandic government. The government’s contention is rooted in preventing Iceland Foods from limiting other businesses in Iceland from using their country’s name for marketing purposes.
In December 2022, the EU Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) decided to uphold a 2019 ruling that annulled the company’s trademark protection. Although this ruling does not impede Iceland Foods’ operations or sales within the EU, it does prohibit the company from monopolising the term ‘Iceland’ for its branding.
Richard Walker, through a LinkedIn post, conveyed the significance of this legal confrontation, referring to it as ‘a really important battle’ for the business. He affirmed that since its inception in 1970, Iceland Foods has become a prominent entity in the UK, with 1000 shops serving 5 million customers weekly, alongside a burgeoning presence in over 65 countries, including several in the EU and EEA.
Despite the ongoing legal uncertainties, Iceland Foods insists that the term ‘Iceland’ reflects ‘the land of ice’ rather than the nation itself. Although no specific comments about the case’s progression have been provided, the retailer anticipates protracted legal engagements.
The trademark dispute between Iceland Foods and the Icelandic government underscores the complexities of global branding and intellectual property rights. As the legal proceedings continue, the outcome will undoubtedly influence how businesses approach trademark strategies in the EU.
