Estée Lauder Sues Jo Malone and Zara UK Over Trademark Infringement Claims

Estée Lauder Companies has filed suit in U.K. courts against British perfumer Jo Malone, her fragrance house Jo Loves Ltd., Jo Loves (Wholesale) Ltd., and ITX UK Ltd., the entity formerly known as Zara UK, alleging trademark infringement, passing off, and breach of contract. The case centres on the appearance of the name "Jo Malone" on fragrance products sold through Zara as part of a collaboration between the retailer and Jo Loves, Malone's independent brand.

The legal action traces back to a deal made more than a quarter century ago. When Estée Lauder acquired Malone's eponymous perfume brand in 1999, it also purchased the rights to use her name commercially. Under the terms of that agreement, Malone agreed to refrain from using the "Jo Malone" name in certain commercial contexts, including the marketing of fragrances. She left her namesake label in 2006 and, after a five-year non-compete period expired, launched Jo Loves in 2011. For years, the two parties coexisted without public dispute.

That changed with the Zara collaboration, which began in 2019. Reporters checking Zara's UK website found the phrase "Created by Jo Malone CBE, founder of Jo Loves" associated with the "Jo Loves Collab" fragrance listings. The BBC separately reported that product packaging carried the wording "A creation by Jo Malone CBE, founder of Jo Loves," though it remained unclear whether the contested phrase appears exclusively on web listings or on physical boxes and bottles as well.

For Estée Lauder, which has expanded Jo Malone London to more than 4,200 points of sale across 84 markets and employs more than 4,000 people under the brand, the use of that name in a Zara context is not merely a contractual technicality. An Estée Lauder spokesperson put it plainly: "Ms. Malone's use of the name 'Jo Malone' in connection with recent commercial ventures goes beyond that legal agreement and undermines Jo Malone London's unique brand equity. We respect Ms. Malone's right to pursue new opportunities. But legally binding contractual obligations cannot be disregarded, and when those terms are breached, we will protect the brand that we have invested in and built over decades."

The claim of passing off, a legal concept describing consumer confusion in which customers are misled into believing a product originates from a different company, adds a further dimension to the suit. Estée Lauder argues that marketing of the Zara collaboration "improperly trades on the reputation of the Jo Malone brand that it now owns" and risks leading shoppers to associate Jo Loves products with the Estée Lauder-owned label.

Legal precedent may not favour Malone. Ben Evans, head of trademarks at law firm Harper James, told the BBC: "The UK courts have shown a willingness to uphold the terms that sellers agree to, even if they restrict the ability of an individual to use their name commercially." He noted similarities between the Malone case and earlier disputes involving fashion designers Karen Millen and Elizabeth Emanuel, the co-designer of Princess Diana's wedding dress, both of whom ultimately lost the right to trade commercially under their own names.

Malone has previously said publicly that she regretted selling the rights to her name. She could not be reached for comment at the time of filing. Zara UK declined to comment, and Inditex, the Spanish parent company of Zara, along with Jo Loves, did not immediately respond to requests. Jo Malone London is headquartered in a Grade II listed Georgian townhouse near Baker Street in London, a building Estée Lauder also uses for events, a detail that underscores just how thoroughly the corporation has absorbed and built around the brand Malone created and sold.

The lawsuit is part of a broader enforcement push by Estée Lauder. Last month, the company sued Walmart in the United States, accusing the retailer of selling imitations of its fragrance and skincare brands, including Clinique, Tom Ford, and Le Labo.