The frozen ice cream of a supermarket chain has to change its name.
After a legal dispute that has lasted for many years, the OLG Munich pronounces a judgment.
Munich - Aldi recently had to take a lot of criticism for an action for the European Football Championship.
Now the discounter chain also has to change one of its products.
A judgment of the Higher Regional Court in Munich ended a legal dispute that had lasted for years.
The stumbling block was an ice cream from Aldi Süd.
The discounter is no longer allowed to sell this under its previous name.
The Aldi ice cream “Champagne Sorbet” has to disappear from the shelves for the time being.
The Munich OLG ruled the French plaintiffs.
The reason: Because the "champagne sorbet" does not taste like champagne, it must not be named that way.
OLG ruled: Aldi ice cream "Champagne Sorbet" is misleadingly named
The judges in the Bavarian capital found that the previous naming of the frozen ice cream was misleading.
Accordingly, the naming of the ice made by Aldi exploited the reputation of the protected term “champagne” in an unjustified way.
The plaintiffs had used the taste of Aldi's “champagne sorbet” as the main argument for their application.
From the French point of view, the ice cream tastes mainly of pear, "followed by sugar, citric acid and a hint of alcohol".
This is how the OLG Munich saw it.
According to the verdict, the Aldi sorbet “does not have a taste that is mainly caused by the champagne ingredient”.
Aldi ice cream "Champagne Sorbet": Product occupied several dishes for years
While the higher regional court in Munich did not name the plaintiffs and defendants, the opposing parties were made public by the champagne association Civic. The OLG was not the first court that had to deal with the dispute over the Aldi ice cream. The product has occupied several judicial bodies over the past nine years. From the Munich Regional Court to the Higher Regional Court in Munich to the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) and the European Court of Justice (ECJ), four courts have already ruled on the “champagne sorbet”.
The ECJ ruling of 2017 finally set the decisive criterion.
A protected designation of origin can therefore be violated by the name of a food “if the food does not have a taste as an essential property, which is mainly caused by the presence of this ingredient in its composition”.
Champagne as an ingredient in Aldi frozen products is apparently not enough.
Since the question of the taste of Aldi's “champagne sorbet” has already been dealt with in the proceedings before the BGH and the ECJ, an appeal against the current OLG ruling is inadmissible.
The Champagne Association hopes that this will send a signal for similar issues.
(kh)
