FAGE v Chobani – a lesson in passing-off and the history of yoghurt

FAGE

Total Greek yoghurt

On 26 March 2013 the High Court handed down judgement in FAGE UK Limited v Chobani UK Limited which proved to be a classic passing-off case, only this time the subject was yoghurt.

Passing-off is an old common law remedy concerned with the protection of reputation and goodwill from misrepresentations made in the course of trade which cause damage.  The three essential requirements for a successful claim were established in the famous Jif lemon case. The plaintiff must:

  1. Establish that there exists goodwill or reputation connected to goods or services offered and which is also in the mind of the purchasing public.
  2. Demonstrate that a misrepresentation has been made to the public which has led or is likely to lead to the conclusion that other goods or services are the same as those offered by the plaintiff.
  3. Suffer or be likely to suffer damage by reason of the erroneous belief of the public.

The question before the High Court was whether the phrase ‘Greek yoghurt’ carried sufficient reputation and goodwill as a distinctive yoghurt made in Greece to warrant protection. Whilst the production of yoghurt can be traced back some 15,000 years, FAGE was undoubtedly assisted by the fact that all yoghurt sold in the UK during the last 25 years labelled ‘Greek yoghurt’ was strained yoghurt made in Greece.

FAGE UK Limited may be more familiar to most as the yoghurt brand ‘Total’ which uses the description ‘Greek yoghurt’ and has been sold in the UK since the mid-1980s. It presently represents 95% by value of yoghurt sold in the UK as Greek.

Chobani

Chobani ‘Greek’ yoghurt

Chobani UK Limited is a more recent US contender in the UK’s ‘Greek yoghurt’ market which it entered towards the end of 2012. It was almost immediately subject to an interim injunction to desist from selling yoghurt under this description obtained by FAGE.

It took a seven day trial during which, according to Mr Justice Briggs, the “parties deployed very substantial forensic effort and ingenuity in seeking to persuade the court to their rival views about the meaning and significance (if any) of … Greek yoghurt.” Mr Justice Briggs was clearly less impressed with Chobani’s witnesses, which on occasion he found resorted to “deliberate untruth”, and more inclined to favour those called on behalf of FAGE.

In the end FAGE won. ‘Greek yoghurt’ means creamy yoghurt made in Greece, the pretence that similarly labelled US yoghurt is the same is wrong and causes damage to the genuine article. FAGE secured a permanent injunction preventing Chobani from marketing its yoghurt in the UK as ‘Greek yoghurt’. It can, however use the descriptor ‘Greek style yoghurt’ which in the UK is predominantly made by means of thickening agents and not any natural straining process. What proportion of the discerning British public will register the distinction remains open to question, but the High Court clearly believed there was a distinction to be made and presumably Chobani too for having fought the case, not wishing to compete with lower value artificially thickened products.

The full judgement is worth a read if only for those interested in a good summary of the history of Greek yoghurt. It also illustrates very well how hard it is to win a passing-off action and the hurdles faced in doing so.

The value of EU Geographical Indication (GI) food and drink products

On 4 March 2013 the European Commission published the results of a study undertaken on the value of Geographical Indication (GI) food products. The results provide some insight into the overall impact of GI products which are considered here from the perspective of the UK.

A GI is the name of a product where a given quality, reputation or other characteristic of the product is essentially attributable to its geographical origin. It is a type of intellectual property right that can apply in the EU to different types of products under one of four schemes:

  1. Wine under Regulation (EC) 1234/2007.
  2. Spirits under Regulation (EC) 110/2008.
  3. Agricultural products and foodstuffs under Regulation (EU) 1151/2012.
  4. Aromatized wine products under Regulation (EEC) 1601/91.

EU Protected Food Names 02.gifA Protected Designation of Origin (PDO) product is one produced, processed and prepared in a defined geographical area using recognised know-how. Products owe their characteristics exclusively or essentially to their place of production and the know-how of local producers.

EU Protected Food Names 01A Protected Geographical Indication (PGI) product is one whose reputation or characteristics are closely linked to production in the geographical area. Agricultural products and foodstuffs must have at least one of the stages of production, processing or preparation which takes place in the area. Wines must use at least 85% of the grapes from the area.

The European Commission believes GIs offer the following benefits:

  • Quality assurance for consumers that they are buying a genuine product with specific qualities.
  • All producers complying with the product specification can benefit, it is not a right owned by an individual or defined group of producers.
  • Since only producers complying with the product specification may use the name competition in the market is fair.
  • The name is protected by the Member States control authorities.
  • A price premium is obtained, on average GI products are sold at a price 2.23 times higher than comparable non-GI products, although in the UK the premium is 1.86 times higher.
  • GI producers may benefit from EU funds for the promotion of quality products.
  • Products are linked to rural areas, which derive associated benefits.
  • GI products help to reconnect consumers and producers, protect local traditions and carry environmental benefits, linking traditional products with landscapes and farming systems.

The study centred on the 2,768 protected names registered on 1 January 2010. The current registers are the E-Bacchus Register for wines, DOOR Database for agricultural products and foodstuffs and E-Spirit-Drinks Database for spirits.

Total sales in 2010 were over €54bn, which is 5.7% of the total value of the food and drink sector across the EU of €956bn. Wine accounts for over a half, 56% of the total sales value of GI products, followed by agricultural products and foodstuffs (29%) and spirits (15%). Aromatised wines account for just 0.1% of sales by value.

The UK had only 1.4% (39) of the total number of GI products but these accounted for 10% of total sales value which placed it in fourth place behind France (38%), Italy (22%) and Germany (11%). The main sectors contributing to sales value in the UK were spirits (81%) and fresh meat (9%) with the higher price premiums being achieved for beers, wine and spirits. Sales of GI products were in total worth €5.5bn (£4.7bn) out of a total £76bn, around 6.2%, in 2010.

Amongst UK agricultural products and foodstuffs, the main categories were fresh meat, seafood, vegetables and cheese. In the period 2005-10 sales decreased in all these categories except fresh meat which by volume grew 33% but in value was up 55%. Cheese production fluctuated reaching a high in 2007 and a low in 2009. The UK was the leading EU producer of GI lamb and beef, 71% and 57% respectively of total EU sales by value.

The premiums indicated are a value premium which does not take into account any additional costs incurred by producers of GI products such as the cost of compliance with a scheme. The actual premium achieved is the subject of a further study currently being carried out to determine the added value for GI producers which should be available early next year.

Full details about the value premium study can be found here.

Front of pack labelling – shuffling deck chairs or making a difference?

On 31 January 2013 the Department of Health (DoH) published Front of Pack Nutrition Labelling: Joint Response to Consultation. The report is a response to the consultation carried out last summer on front of pack (FoP) nutrition labelling in which the Department of Health states its commitment to the provision of information aimed at helping people make healthy choices. Will it make a difference?

Traffic Light Label

Traffic Light Label

These proposals have to be seen in the context of the EU wide food information to consumers (FIC) Regulation (EC) 1169/2011 which introduces a new food labelling framework over the coming years and will be fully effective in 2016.

A total of 191 full responses from manufacturers, retailers, public bodies, voluntary organisations and individuals were received and a further 948 individuals responded to a shortened version of the consultation. Not surprisingly a strong theme to emerge was the need for consistency of approach. That said, views on how to present the information were mixed – percentage Guideline Daily Amounts (%GDAs), colour coding (traffic lights), high/medium/low (HML) text in various combinations. A majority, however, favoured information on energy in addition to fat, saturated fats, sugars and salt provided on a per portion basis.

Whilst Annex V to the FIC regulation was considered a good starting point for a list of foods exempt FoP labelling, there were plenty of suggestions for both additions and exclusions. The Annex V exemptions include unprocessed products comprising a single ingredient or category of ingredients and processed products where processing consists only of maturing and that comprise a single ingredient or category of ingredients. The picture emerging is not one leading to the clear presentation of useful information.

The key decision had in fact been taken last October when the DoH announced that it was working on a FoP labelling scheme that combined %GDAs with colour coding, that decision, it is said, took account of the response to the consultation and the present report deals with wider issues. The actions now proposed are:

  • Give consideration to whether colour coded energy values are included.
  • Let businesses decide which products carry FoP labelling.
  • Consider the need for further guidance on whether nutritional information is provided ‘as sold’ or ‘as consumed’.

No action is to be taken to introduce yet another ‘health’ logo to accredit the ‘healthiest’ foods or the use of ‘pings’ highlighting energy content, but watch this space.

Meanwhile, consultation on Defra’s plans for legislation which underpins and enables the FIC to be enforced in the UK drew to a close on 30 January. The confusion of present and forthcoming legislation is quite enough, why add to it with a voluntary FoP labelling measure full of contradictions? The most likely reaction of consumers faced with this situation will be to ignore it all and just opt for long-standing favoured items. It will make little difference to healthy choices being made.

These are not proposals rooted in the fundamentals of what makes a good diet. This is an agenda being driven, yet again, by the processed food industry and it is hard not to conclude that all this is simply a shuffling the proverbial deck chairs as we drift towards the iceberg of obesity. Pity the poor consumer.

Food Standards Agency – consultation on the future of raw drinking milk

IMPORTANT NOTICE

Last Updated 22 November 2012

The Food Standards Agency (FSA) is organising a number of discussion groups concerning the future regulation of raw drinking milk. The first meeting was  in  Cheltenham on the evening of Tuesday, 16 October 2012.

If your are an advocate of raw milk or maybe you simply think it is important, on this issue, that we safeguard freedom of choice do take part in these discussions.

The FSA has arranged further discussion group meetings as follows:

Taunton                                                           12 November 2012

Kent                                                                  20 November 2012

Hebden Bridge, West Yorkshire                 27 November 2012

The meetings are open to both producers and consumers of raw milk. The idea is for small groups of people to get together for a discussion on the consumption of raw drinking milk to assist the FSA in understanding consumption patterns, what people know about raw drinking milk, why they prefer it to pasteurised milk and what are the benefits.

Further details are available from Micah McGuire at the Food  Standards Agency, e-mail: Micah.McGuire@foodstandards.gsi.gov.uk

This post will be updated as more information becomes available. Meanwhile, help spread the word to ensure the FSA is left in no doubt about the importance and need for a continuing supply of high quality raw drinking milk!

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: