Salon owner takes on L'Oréal in legal battle and wins - but at 'cruel' cost

A salon owner being taken to court by L'Oréal in a bitter trademark row over her business has won her David V Goliath legal battle against the cosmetics giant. Rebecca Dowdeswell, 49, has been locked in a ongoing dispute with the beauty company for the past three years over the use of her company named nkd.

L'Oréal - which has a range of beauty products called Naked- launched legal proceedings in 2022 after saying the name would cause "consumer confusion". Rebecca has since been forced to close one of her salons and forked out in excess of £30,000 trying to take on the $233.22 billion company herself.

And the French firm has now backed down and conceded Rebecca will be allowed to use the brand names she wishes - a week before the case was due to be settled in court. Rebecca has told how she feels vindicated by the decision but has blasted the "underhand and unethical" tactics used by the "bullying" company.

Mum-of-two Rebecca, of Nottingham, said: "I'm glad but it doesn't feel like much of a victory considering how much it has cost me to get to this point.

"Part of my business, which had been successful and thriving, still remains closed today as a result of this ongoing dispute and it has cost me a great deal. I feel vindicated but the costs I could get back are just a fraction of what I have spent contesting this.

"The way they have waited until the 11th hour to back down just feels cruel. I don't feel like I've won anything really because it was always my trademark to keep, it was my brand name and created by me.

"Yet it is me who has had to pay out huge legal costs and then there's the added cost of the business closure. It feels bittersweet to be honest because the whole process has been incredibly frustrating."

READ MORE: The Range giving away free gifts if you say these two words - but you'll need to be quick

READ MORE: Moment mobility scooter drives down busy dual carriageway leaves drivers stunned

Rebecca became embroiled in the "aggressive" row in 2022 when L'Oreal opposed attempts to renew her trademark. She had opened her waxing business in 2009 with two salons - one in Nottingham and one in Leicester.

But she was forced to close her Nottingham salon after being taken to court by the beauty giant in September 2022. This was due to Urban Decay, a L'Oréal brand, having a range of eyeshadow pallets called Naked.

The legal battle had been due to be settled next Wednesday (November 5) at a tribunal hearing overseen by the Intellectual Property Office (IPO). A deadline was set by for the submission of skeleton arguments on Wednesday (October 29) at which point L'Oréal revealed they were cutting back the scope of their case.

This includes no longer objecting to hair and tanning salons, laser hair removal services and a number of cosmetic products she had been trying to trademark. She added: "We could have come to a co-existence agreement right from the very start yet they have dragged it out this long.

"I even said I would keep the name off make-up and cosmetics to come to a deal. This was despite my brand name being registered in the UK 13 years before theirs was.

"The whole saga has been sad and unnecessary - there's no real winners here. They have backed down on everything to do with the salons - so I can keep my trademark on those.

"And they have said they will make a far wider concession on what is to be allowed product wise - but it is not clear what exactly this is yet.

"They have waited the day before the skeleton arguments were due to be submitted to concede all these things, which is unbelievably underhand and unethical.

"It's just indicative of their behaviour throughout and I hope now somebody hold them to account and asks why this has been allowed to get to this point. They have backed down but it doesn't feel like a victory to me as the whole process has been time-consuming and draining.

"I haven't been able to invest the time, energy and resources into the business which I set up and it could have all been avoided three years ago. "

Trademark attorney Aaron Wood, who is representing Rebecca, said: "It's very much a win and she should be getting the bubbly out. But it has been such a stressful, expensive and time-consuming process for her, which should never have got to this point.

"She has had sleepless nights worrying about whether the brand she had created would be taken off her after 16 years. It's either they have simply tried to bully her and ploughed on thinking she will cave because of the costs involved.

"Or this is just one small case in many there are involved with and they didn't give it the right attention, because their evidence was, to put it mildly, not the best.

"But to take it along this far is just cynical, they have changed their evidence at the 11th hour. I'm just so surprised they have decided to push it this far. The matter could have easily been resolved two or three years ago.

"Although Rebecca will be pleased she will now get her trademark no matter what, it’s been hugely frustrating that it’s taken all this time, stress and expense."

A L'Oreal spokesperson said: "Since 2022 L’Oréal's position has never changed or been updated. We have always been willing to work with Rebecca Dowdeswell to support her business aspirations whilst respecting our longstanding trademark rights.

"The proceedings are still ongoing and we remain wholly committed to resolving this matter in a mutually agreeable way."