The ongoing trademark dispute between Iceland Foods and the Icelandic government has entered its latest phase.
- The European Union’s General Court in Luxembourg saw the supermarket’s latest appeal.
- This legal challenge follows a 2019 ruling that removed Iceland’s EU trademark protection.
- Iceland Foods argues its longstanding use of the name refers to ‘land of ice’, not the nation.
- The legal proceedings, ongoing since 2016, are described as crucial by Iceland Foods.
Iceland Foods has initiated a new appeal against the Icelandic government in the ongoing legal dispute concerning the trademark of the word ‘Iceland’. The situation escalated to the General Court of the European Union, where Executive Chairman Richard Walker OBE presented opening statements on 16 October. This marks the third round in an extensive legal battle that has spanned eight years.
The origin of this dispute traces back to 2016, when the Icelandic government contested Iceland Foods’ EU trademark, originally secured in 2014. The contention arose after the supermarket sought to restrict Icelandic producers from using their country’s name to market their products.
In December 2022, the EU Intellectual Property Office upheld a prior decision from 2019 that invalidated Iceland’s trademark protection for the word. This revocation does not impede the company’s operations or sales within the European Union, but it negates its exclusive rights to the use of the name across the bloc.
Richard Walker emphasised the significance of this legal challenge for Iceland Foods, stating on LinkedIn that it represents an ‘important battle’ for the family business. He highlighted the company’s extensive presence, with a brand name established in the UK since 1970, over 1,000 stores, and five million weekly customers.
Despite the lack of an official response from Iceland Foods regarding the ongoing proceedings, the company anticipates a prolonged legal journey. They maintain that the name ‘Iceland’ is emblematic of the ‘land of ice’ rather than the nation itself.
The resolution of this trademark dispute remains uncertain as the legal proceedings continue.
