To bee or not to bee: Is the 'Manuka Honey' dispute coming to an end?.

Key takeaways

• In 2017, the UK Intellectual Property Office decided in favour of the New Zealand ‘Manuka Honey Appellation Society’ (MHAS), agreeing to place a certification mark on tubs of Manuka Honey originating from New Zealand.
• In 2021, in Australia, the MHAS opposed the registration of the term ‘Australian Manuka’. The Registrar’s delegate did not agree with the opposition.
• Similarly, in December 2021, a new UK decision rejected the MHAS’s attempt to trade mark the term ‘Manuka’.
• The term ‘Manuka’ was held to be a descriptive term rather than an indication of exclusive geographic origin.

New Zealand thought the decision was the bees knee’s
The growth of the Manuka Honey industry shows no signs of slowing, with the global industry forecast to be worth $1.27b by the year 2027. It is therefore, no surprise that key stakeholders are keen to gain, and retain control over the industry.

In 2017, the MHAS successfully applied in New Zealand for a certification trade mark for ‘Manuka Honey’ to certify that the honey possessed certain characteristics, eg that it originated from New Zealand. The fact that this application was successful suggested that the exclusive geographic origin was a prevailing factor over the descriptive nature of the term ‘Manuka’. This decision was opposed by the Australian Manuka Honey Association Limited and this dispute is ongoing.

Sweet outcome – the decisions
2021 was however, a much sweeter year for Australian Manuka Honey, with decisions making a beeline in their favour in both Australia and the UK.

In Australia, the MHAS relied on s43 of Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth) to oppose the registration of the term ‘Australian Manuka’, along with a flower, on the grounds that use of the term would be misleading and be likely to deceive or cause confusion.

The delegate to the Registrar of Trade Marks found:

• although a Māori first discovered the Leptospernum Scoparium flower that Manuka Honey was derived from, all honey produced from that flower was always referred to as ‘Manuka’, even in Australia.
• various organisations such as the New Zealand Ministry of Primary Industry also recognize ‘Australian Manuka’ in their definition of Manuka Honey.
• the term ‘Manuka Honey’ was an indication that the honey was derived from the Leptospernum Scoparium flower and not an indication that it exclusively originated from New Zealand.

Based upon these findings, the delegate refused the MHAS’s opposition.

Similarly, in December 2021 in the UK, another trade mark dispute was decided which followed the same principles. The UK Intellectual Property Office acknowledged that ‘Manuka’ was originally a Māori term but concluded that it was now a part of everyday English. They stated that the term ‘Manuka’ was used to describe a class of honey that originates not only from New Zealand but also other locations such as Australia.

MHAS have also sought to trade mark the term Manuka in the United States, the EU and China. However, none of these applications have been successful.

These ‘sweet’ decisions demonstrate that New Zealand’s misleading and confusing opposition has evidently now lost ground.