Interflora Inc v. Marks & Spencer plc (2014)

“When digital advertising borrows a rival’s name, the law must decide whether it sells competition—or confusion.”

Short Description :

This landmark British case examined the legality of keyword advertising where one trader purchases another’s trademark as an online search keyword. The dispute balanced two competing interests: the right to advertise competitively and the need to prevent consumer confusion. The decision reshaped European online marketing law by confirming that use of a rival’s mark in internet ads can amount to trademark infringement if it blurs the origin of goods or services in consumers’ minds.

Facts :

Interflora, the international flower-delivery network, discovered that Marks & Spencer (M&S) had bought the term “Interflora” and similar words as Google AdWords. Whenever users searched for “Interflora,” M&S advertisements appeared at the top of the search results, inviting them to order flowers from M&S. Interflora alleged that this diverted its customers and created the false impression that M&S was associated with or part of its network. The issue reached the High Court of England and Wales, which referred questions to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) for clarification.

Findings / Reasoning :

The CJEU held that using another’s mark as a keyword is not automatically unlawful. The decisive question is whether the advertisement enables the average internet user to determine clearly that the goods come from someone other than the trademark owner. In this case, the ads placed by M&S failed to make that distinction obvious. The court reasoned that such conduct impairs the mark’s ability to perform its essential function—guaranteeing origin and maintaining brand image. Hence, the English court ultimately found M&S liable for infringement.

Suggestions / Observations :

The ruling encouraged fair digital competition while warning advertisers against exploiting competitors’ names in a misleading manner. It underscored that intellectual-property law must evolve with new marketing technologies and consumer behavior. Businesses were advised to design online ads that clearly identify their independence from trademark owners.

Judgment & Date :

The High Court of England and Wales, following the CJEU guidance, ruled in 2014 that M&S infringed Interflora’s trademark by using its name as a keyword likely to mislead consumers.