Nivea vs Ponds: Why are two famous moisturiser brands battling in court?

A legal battle has unfolded between Nivea and Ponds over oil content, hydration, market practices, and the use of a specific colour

A contentious legal dispute has been ongoing for over three years between two of India's most renowned moisturiser brands, involving discussions about oil content, hydration, market practices, and the ownership of a specific colour.

In 2021, Beiersdorf AG, the producer of Nivea creams, filed a case against Hindustan Unilever Limited at the Delhi High Court, accusing Ponds salespersons of unfair market practices in various shopping centres around the city.

Their approach was to compare the two products by applying Nivea cream to one hand and Ponds to the other for customers at malls. They used a magnifying glass to demonstrate that NIVEA's cream left a more noticeable residue compared to the "super light gel" from Ponds.

 

Beiersdorf AG demanded a "permanent injunction restraining infringement of trademark, unfair trade practices, disparagement, dilution and damages".

Ponds responded by claiming that their use of a generic "blue tub" was devoid of any Nivea branding. They argued that Nivea does not have exclusive rights to the colour blue and maintained that their representation of Ponds cream as "less sticky" was accurate.

In contrast, Nivea argued that Ponds had inaccurately compared two fundamentally different categories of creams. They highlighted that their product, containing "25 per cent fatty matter," was a heavy cream, whereas Ponds marketed a "super light gel" with only "10 per cent fatty matter." Nivea suggested that a fairer comparison would be between Nivea Men's fresh gel and Ponds' super light gel, as both belong to the gel moisturiser category, and the Nivea product contains only 1.35 per cent fat.

Justice Anish Dayal ruled that the defendant's actions of comparing their products with Nivea's, whether explicitly or implicitly, were prima facie misleading and disparaging, causing significant harm to Nivea.

Regarding the colour blue, Hindustan Unilever Limited's argument was not found to be persuasive. The court concluded that the defendant's use of a blue tub in the same distinctive shade seemed to be deliberately aimed at making consumers associate it with Nivea's product, thus requiring Ponds to change the colour of its tubs to avoid confusion.