Jo Malone hopes ‘sense will prevail’ in lawsuit over her name

Jo Malone Hopes ‘Common Sense Will Triumph’ in Legal Dispute Over Her Name

Perfume Creator Faces Lawsuit from Estée Lauder Over Collaboration with Zara

Jo Malone, the renowned perfume designer, has expressed her desire for ‘common sense to triumph’ in a legal battle involving her name and Estée Lauder, the global beauty corporation. The dispute centers on a collaboration between Jo Loves and Zara, which Estée Lauder has taken to court, alleging misuse of Malone’s name on product packaging.

Malone originally established her eponymous brand, Jo Malone London, in the early 1990s. In 1999, Estée Lauder acquired the company, along with the rights to her name, for an undisclosed sum. She later launched Jo Loves in 2011, offering a range of scents, candles, and toiletries. The recent collaboration with Zara began seven years ago and was designed to highlight Jo Loves as the independent entity.

“I can’t stop being a person,” Malone stated in an Instagram video. “I’m questioning why Estée Lauder is pursuing legal action now, especially since the partnership with Zara started in 2019. If the use of my name was improper back then, it remains so today, and no one raised concerns at the time.”

The packaging for the collaboration featured the line: “A creation by Jo Malone CBE, founder of Jo Loves.” Estée Lauder argues that this blurs the distinction between their brand and Malone’s, claiming a breach of the 1999 agreement which barred her from using the ‘Jo Malone’ name in commercial contexts. The lawsuit seeks to address trademark infringement and contractual violations.

Zara has not provided a statement, while Estée Lauder emphasized the importance of upholding legal terms. “She agreed to clear contractual terms that included refraining from using the Jo Malone name in certain commercial contexts, including the marketing of fragrances,” a spokesperson noted. “She was compensated for this, and for many years, she followed the agreement. We respect her pursuit of new ventures, but contractual obligations must be honored.”

Malone, who remains a creative force since selling the brand in 1999, has previously expressed regret over the non-compete clause that restricted her from developing new fragrance lines until 2011. In her latest remarks, she reaffirmed her stance: “I hope common sense will prevail and we can find a new way to coexist in the same market.”