Aussie coffee brand Vittoria sued over glass jar similarities to American-Dutch coffee giant Moccona

A major legal fight has erupted between Aussie coffee brand Vittoria and the second largest coffee company in the world, all over a single detail in the company’s instant coffee glass jar packaging.

Aussie coffee brand Vittoria has secured a major court victory over the second largest coffee company in the world, all over a single detail in the company’s instant coffee glass jar packaging.

Aussie coffee brand Vittoria has secured a major court victory against one of the largest coffee companies in the world, after it was accused of passing off Moccona’s instant coffee glass jar packaging.

American-Dutch coffee giant Jacobs Douwe Egberts (JDE) – the maker of the Moccona instant coffee brand, along with Campos, L’Or, Harris and Sacred Grounds – sued the makers of Vittoria coffee, Cantarella Bros, over allegations it infringed on their iconic glass jar designs.

JDE alleged by using its similar-looking jar design, Cantaralla had engaged in “misleading and deceptive conduct” because their product would be mistaken for Moccona’s.

Both companies use 400g glass jars to sell their freeze-dried instant coffee in supermarkets across the country.

In his Federal Court judgment, Justice Michael Wheelahan dismissed JDE’s claim, finding the claims of Vittoria passing off the brand were not proved.

The owners of coffee brand Moccona sued Vittoria in the Federal Court over accusations the Aussie company passed off their iconic glass jar design. Picture: Supplied

Vittoria started selling instant coffee in glass jars in 2021. The court found the glass jar designs were not “deceptively similar, dismissing JDE’s claim. Picture: Supplied

He said the Moccona jar had a “fairly squat body” that sits beneath a slowly sloping shoulder and a tall lid – making up two thirds of the overall height.

The Vittoria jar was “noticeably taller” and had a “a compressed neck section, and a plain, low lid”.

Justice Wheelahan said there was no real risk a shopper would “pause for thought” before concluding that there was “no necessary commercial connection between coffee sold” in both jars.

“If the container has no distinctive features, it is difficult to see what the consumer can rely upon in order to judge whether another container is ‘like’ it or ‘similar’ to it, rather than ‘unlike’ it or ‘dissimilar’ to it,” he said.

Justice Wheelahan noted one problem with JDE’s argument was that because the container “lacks all distinctiveness, practically any container could be confused with it”.

“As, on the logic of the argument, there is nothing that consumers can use to tell the registered mark apart from other containers,” he continued.

“This would be to give a sweeping monopoly over a range of shapes that are, simply put, barely similar to the generic shape in question.”

“I conclude that the Cantarella jar shape is not deceptively similar to the (JDE) shape mark.”

Justice Wheelahan said there was no real risk a shopper would make the commercial connection between the coffee sold in both jars. Picture: NewsWire / Glenn Campbell

Moccona-branded instant coffee was launched in Australia in 1960.

Vittoria first began selling instant coffee in glass jars during the Covid-19 pandemic in 2021.

In a statement following the judgment, Vittoria said the claim cost a significant amount in legal fees and noted “very few family-owned coffee companies would have been able to afford such litigation”.

“Vittoria’s 400g Freeze Dried Instant Coffee jar provides fair competition in a 400g market segment that had been dominated by Douwe Egberts for many years,” the company said in a statement.

“More competition can only mean better deals for Australian consumers.”

Chief executive Les Schirato said Vittoria would never pass off Moccona’s instant coffee reputation.

In their own statement, JDE said they were reviewing the Federal Court’s decision carefully.

“We are disappointed with the finding that the Moccona Jar trademark was not infringed,” a spokesman told The Sydney Morning Herald. It is our firm belief that, while competition is a healthy and important part of Australia’s vibrant coffee scene, competition must be fair,” the spokesperson said.

A further case management hearing for costs will be heard next week.