Switzerland’s highest court has ruled that plant-based products cannot use the term “milk” under any circumstances, marking a significant development for the alternative dairy sector and food labelling regulations.
The decision by the Federal Supreme Court came in a case involving Danone and its plant-based brand Alpro, whose oat-based drink is sold in major Swiss retailers, including Migros and Coop.
At the centre of the case was packaging carrying the phrase “Shhh… this is not milk,” with stylised branding designed to evoke dairy products.
Authorities in Zurich challenged the labelling, arguing that it could mislead consumers, particularly given the product’s white-and-blue carton, commonly associated with cow’s milk.
The cantonal laboratory in Zurich, responsible for monitoring food labelling and safety, determined that the presentation risked confusion. A Zurich court upheld this view, concluding that the overall packaging could mislead an average consumer.
The Federal Supreme Court has now reinforced that position. In a 4–1 majority ruling, it determined that the term “milk” is legally reserved for animal-derived products and cannot appear on plant-based alternatives, even in a negated form such as “not milk.”
Swiss food law requires that plant-based substitutes be labelled in a way that avoids confusion with animal products. This extends beyond dairy to meat analogues, with terms like “salami” or “meatloaf” also restricted for vegan goods.
The Federal Food Safety and Veterinary Office has previously advised that even disclaimers or negative phrasing could be misleading. The Supreme Court’s ruling goes further by codifying that interpretation into binding legal precedent.
The decision follows an earlier ruling prohibiting the use of “planted chicken” for a plant-based product, signalling a consistent tightening of terminology rules.
Unlike regulatory guidance or evolving EU practices, Supreme Court decisions are binding across Switzerland, leaving little room for interpretation at the cantonal level.
However, the judgment may sit uneasily with market realities. Plant-based and dairy products are widely merchandised side by side and often used interchangeably by consumers in applications such as coffee and breakfast cereals.
A dissenting judge in the case argued that Swiss consumers are unlikely to confuse plant-based drinks with dairy, noting the widespread everyday use of terms like “soy milk” and “almond milk.” The majority, however, prioritised a strict legal definition over common usage.
Notably, the ruling was not based on empirical consumer research. Neither the court nor Zurich’s cantonal laboratory conducted studies to determine whether shoppers are genuinely misled by terms such as “oat milk.”
A 2024 Swiss study found that consumers overwhelmingly distinguish between plant-based and dairy products, correctly categorising them as separate.
For manufacturers, the ruling underscores the need to reassess branding and packaging strategies in Switzerland. Companies marketing plant-based alternatives will likely need to adopt more neutral descriptors such as “oat drink” or “plant-based beverage.”
