The Future of Oatly's Brand Without 'Milk' Trademark

The Swedish plant-based drinks manufacturer Oatly has faced a considerable legal blow in the UK following a Supreme Court ruling in February 2025 that prevents the company from trademarking or using the phrase "Post Milk Generation" in connection with its oat-based range.

The ruling represents the final chapter of an extended legal battle with Dairy UK and carries significant consequences for how plant-based manufacturers market themselves within regulated food sectors.

The legal challenge originated when Oatly attempted to register "Post Milk Generation" as a trademark with the UK Intellectual Property Office (IPO). While the phrase received official registration in 2021, Dairy UK, which represents British dairy farmers, contested the decision. The trade body argued that trademark and food labelling regulations restrict the term "milk" to products of animal origin.

The IPO sided with Dairy UK, ruling that incorporating the word "milk" in this manner was "deceptive".

Oatly challenged this determination in the High Court and initially won. The Court of Appeal subsequently reversed that decision, reinstating the IPO's stance.

The matter progressed to the Supreme Court, which delivered a unanimous verdict that Oatly could neither register the slogan as a trademark nor deploy it in relation to oat-based products.

Legal boundaries in food terminology

The Supreme Court determined that "milk" was being employed to describe food and drink and that the phrase did not qualify for any exemption permitting protected terminology to convey a "characteristic quality" of a product.

According to the BBC, the court indicated that "post-milk generation" could mislead consumers regarding whether Oatly's offerings were completely milk-free or simply contained lower quantities of milk.

Food regulations specify that milk originates from the dairy sector and exclusively from animal sources.

For marketing departments throughout the plant-based industry, the decision underscored the boundaries of what is frequently termed "category borrowing" - adopting established category language to assist consumers in understanding emerging alternatives.

According to the Telegraph, Richard May, a partner from law firm Osborne Clarke, says: "In practical terms, terminology such as 'oat milk' or 'plant-based cheese' now carries heightened legal risk in the UK market. Marketing teams will need to ensure that product names and campaign messaging do not stray into protected territory."

Responses from the industry

Dairy UK expressed support for the outcome. Judith Bryans, the organisation's chief executive, says the ruling "helps ensure that long-established dairy terms continue to carry clear meaning for consumers".

She additionally characterises it as delivering "greater certainty for businesses" whilst permitting suitable descriptors where legislation allows.

Oatly, conversely, presented the case as restricting competition. Bryan Carroll, general manager for UK and Ireland at the company, says the dispute was "a way to stifle competition and is not in the interests of the British public".

He contends that the ruling "creates unnecessary confusion and an uneven playing field for plant-based products that solely benefits big dairy", according to the BBC.

Comparable limitations exist for terminology including cream, butter, cheese and yoghurt.

Strategic implications for plant-based brands

From a marketing standpoint, the judgement necessitates a strategic reassessment. Oatly's brand positioning has historically depended on assertive, culturally relevant messaging that frames its customers as participants in a movement.

The restriction on using "milk" as a branding tool in the UK diminishes the rhetorical distinction between dairy and plant-based offerings.

The verdict also indicates regulatory convergence with the EU, where discussions surrounding the labelling of plant-based alternatives persist.

For the present, the UK Supreme Court has established a definitive boundary: within food marketing, "milk" remains designated for animal-derived products. For Oatly and rival brands, the question is no longer whether they can utilise the term, but rather how they construct brand value in its absence.