The United Kingdom’s Supreme Court has ruled that plant-based food producers may not use traditional dairy terms such as “milk,” “cheese,” “butter” or “yoghurt” to market non-animal alternatives, delivering a significant decision that clarifies labelling standards and strengthens protections for established dairy definitions.

In a judgment handed down this week, the court determined that existing food labelling regulations reserve dairy terminology exclusively for products derived from animal milk.

The ruling follows a legal challenge centred on whether plant-based alternatives could continue using familiar descriptors when accompanied by qualifiers such as “plant-based” or “vegan.” The court concluded that even with clarifying language, such usage risks misleading consumers and undermines statutory definitions embedded in UK and retained European Union food law.

The decision reinforces regulatory interpretations that dairy designations are legally protected categories tied to specific production processes and ingredients.

While certain long-standing exceptions such as “coconut milk” remain recognised due to historical precedent, the court made clear that newer plant-based analogues must adopt alternative naming conventions.

Industry groups representing dairy producers welcomed the judgment, arguing that it safeguards transparency and prevents market confusion.

They contended that dairy terminology carries nutritional and compositional meaning that should not be diluted.

Plant-based manufacturers, by contrast, warned that the ruling may require widespread rebranding, packaging changes and marketing adjustments, potentially increasing costs in a sector that has seen rapid consumer growth over the past decade.

The government is expected to issue updated guidance to ensure compliance across retailers and manufacturers.

Food standards authorities indicated that enforcement will focus on clarity and consumer protection, with transitional arrangements likely to allow companies time to adjust labelling.

The ruling arrives amid broader debate over the regulation of alternative proteins and the pace of innovation in food technology.

While demand for plant-based products continues to expand, the court’s decision underscores that branding and marketing claims must align strictly with statutory definitions.

The outcome is poised to influence regulatory approaches beyond the United Kingdom, as other jurisdictions weigh how to balance innovation with established food labelling frameworks.