In a judgment handed down on July 31, at the English High Court, Justice Colin Birss ruled that Victoria’s Secret’s use of the word on its goods infringed Thomas Pink’s trademark.

Thomas Pink filed a lawsuit in May last year, claiming the use of the word ‘pink’ by the US company when it launched its Pink brand in the UK in 2012 could mislead customers.

Birss agreed and said Victoria’s Secret aimed to have a “sexy, mass market appeal” and that consumers in Europe may be in danger of associating the two brands.

He added that the confusion could cause consumers to expect to find lingerie in Thomas Pink stores and be “surprised” when they did not find any.

In a statement, Jonathan Heilbron, president and chief executive of Thomas Pink, said he was “delighted” with the outcome.

“We will continue to protect the considerable investment that has been made into building Thomas Pink into a leading luxury clothing brand,” he added.

Despite the judgment, Tom Carl, senior associate at Taylor Wessing LLP, said the case would not open the door for other fashion brands to monopolise colour names.

“Thomas Pink’s trademark is only registered in a specific logo form-not the word itself-and the court held that it was only valid due to having ‘acquired distinctiveness’ among consumers, having been used as a brand since the company opened its doors in 1984,” Carl said.

Carl added that the judgment did not give Thomas Pink a complete monopoly on the colour pink.

“There were a number of specific factors in this case, and other scenarios will have to be considered on a case-by-case basis. For example, Victoria’s Secret was not just using the word pink on its clothing-it had also launched stores under that name,” Carl said.

Thomas Pink and Victoria’s Secret are also disputing the rights to the name in the US, where the underwear maker has asked a US court to issue a declaratory judgment of non-infringement.