“Dubai Chocolate” Must Originate from Dubai – Cologne Higher Regional Court Prohibits Misleading Indication of Origin
Warnings and Legal Actions – The confectionery distributor Wilmers, which is also conducting the proceedings before the Higher Regional Court (OLG) Cologne, is currently issuing cease-and-desist letters to retailers.
In its July 2025 decision (Case No. 6 U 65/25), the OLG Cologne prohibited a German food retailer from distributing or advertising a chocolate product under the label “Dubai Chocolate” in Germany if the product was not actually manufactured in Dubai or otherwise had no genuine geographic connection to the Emirate. The court made it clear that the term “Dubai Chocolate” constitutes a geographic indication of origin – not merely a fantasy name or reference to a particular recipe. This ruling has significant implications for the food and advertising industries and provides clear guidance on how to handle geographic origin claims in a globalized marketplace.
Background: The Dispute Over Origin
The claimant is a distributor specializing in the import of exclusive confectionery, including the product known as “B. Dubai Chocolate,” which is produced in Dubai by a licensed manufacturer. Distribution is managed via a service company based in Dubai, exclusively for the European market. The product gained widespread popularity—driven largely by TikTok trends and social media—commanding high prices both online and in brick-and-mortar retail.
By contrast, the defendant had a similar chocolate product manufactured in Turkey and marketed it under the name “Dubai Chocolate.” The packaging featured the iconic silhouettes of the Burj Khalifa and Burj Al Arab, along with English-language descriptions. The claimant saw this as misleading to consumers and filed for a preliminary injunction—initially granted by the Cologne Regional Court. However, the lower court later overturned the injunction, finding no risk of consumer deception. The claimant appealed—successfully.
OLG Cologne: Origin Is More Than a Recipe
The Higher Regional Court of Cologne overruled the lower court and held that “Dubai Chocolate” is a protected geographic indication under §§ 126 ff. of the German Trademark Act (MarkenG). According to the court, consumers would interpret “Dubai” not as a reference to ingredients (like pistachio cream and kadaifi pastry), but as a geographic origin. This interpretation is reinforced by the fact that the recipe was originally developed in Dubai and the media hype is explicitly linked to the city.
The court rejected the lower court’s assumption that “Dubai Chocolate” had become a generic term. A term ceases to be a protected geographic indicator only if the majority of the public no longer understands it as such. That was not the case here. The average consumer, said the court, expects a product labeled “Dubai Chocolate” to either come from Dubai or have undergone key production steps there.
The term “Dubai Handmade Chocolate” was always understood as a direct indication of origin. Consumers do not perceive it as a fantasy name or merely a recipe description.
Even a cursory reading of the name suggests that the public understands “Dubai” as referring to the Emirate or its capital city. Such labels are to be considered origin claims unless it is clearly shown that the term is used in a non-geographic or fanciful sense.
In this case, the origin of the recipe in Dubai—developed by Sarah Hamouda, founder of Fix Dessert Chocolatier—along with viral TikTok videos by influencers Maria Vehera and German food blogger Kiki Aweimer, strongly pointed to a geographic origin. These influencers tasted the chocolate in Dubai and shared their enthusiasm with millions of followers.
The initially high prices and limited availability in Germany also reinforced the consumer perception that this was a product of origin. Consumers were willing to pay premium prices and wait in long lines because they associated the chocolate with the exclusivity of Dubai (Jehle, GRUR 2025, p. 215, 220). Some even resold it at marked-up prices on online platforms.
Importantly, this desire wasn’t only due to the luxurious pistachio-based recipe, but also to the perception that the product originated from Dubai—a city associated with premium quality and luxury experiences.
Packaging and Marketing Reinforce Origin Misconception
The court also pointed to the packaging design as a factor contributing to consumer deception. It featured iconic Dubai landmarks such as the Burj Khalifa and Burj Al Arab, occupying a significant portion of the front design. Under EU law (Regulation 1151/2012), referencing a place of origin on packaging argues against a term being classified as generic (see Feta II, GRANA BIRAGHI cases). Thus, even if the image alone weren’t enough, the presence of the word “Dubai” on the package firmly linked the product to the Emirate in consumers’ minds.
Furthermore, the use of English-language packaging indicated an imported product. Consumers, especially in this context, would interpret it as originating from the place referenced—Dubai.
Misleading by Design – § 127 MarkenG
The court concluded that the packaging and presentation created a misleading impression of geographic origin under § 127(1) MarkenG. The use of Dubai’s skyline, English text, and a luxurious aesthetic all reinforced the impression that the product was imported from Dubai. Consumers, particularly with high-end products like this, are especially sensitive to implied origin claims, which suggest exclusivity and authenticity.
The defendant’s argument—that consumers understand that products are globally produced and ingredients don’t always originate from the named location—did not persuade the court. Even if pistachios aren’t grown in Dubai, consumers expect that the final product is at least manufactured or assembled there.
Unfair Competition – § 5 UWG
In addition to trademark law, the court found a violation of § 5 of the German Unfair Competition Act (UWG). Even if one were to interpret “Dubai Chocolate” as a mere description of the recipe, the packaging and advertising created a misleading impression of origin that could influence consumer purchasing decisions—making it unfair commercial practice.
No Security Required – Strict Standards for Importers
The defendant’s request to require a security deposit as a condition for enforcing the preliminary injunction was denied. The court found no risk of unusually high damages and no concrete harm to the defendant. By contrast, the claimant lacked the means to provide such security. Therefore, the court prioritized effective legal protection.
Significance of the Ruling
The OLG Cologne’s decision sends a clear message: Geographic origin designations remain legally protected—even in a globalized economy. Companies hoping to benefit from the image of a specific place must ensure that their products genuinely originate there, particularly when using premium pricing and exclusive marketing tactics.
The ruling also makes clear that viral popularity and extensive media coverage do not automatically turn a protected designation into a generic term. Such transformations are rare and must meet stringent requirements.
For the advertising and food industries, the takeaway is clear: Use of geographic names requires caution—especially when tied to well-known cities or regions. If the label says Dubai, it must actually be from Dubai.
