Mondelēz Demands Vegan Brand Moo Free Pull 'Snowballs' From Shelves

Mondelēz International has sent a legal letter demanding that Moo Free, a small vegan chocolate maker, pull its White Choccy Snowballs from shelves over the word "snowball." The Cadbury and Toblerone owner accuses the Devon-based firm of trademark infringement just days before Christmas, the busiest sales period of the year.

The disputed product is a gluten-free, biscuit-flavoured rice ball covered in dairy-free white chocolate. Mondelēz says the name collides with a trademark it registered in 2001 covering "Snowball" and "Snowballs" for chocolate confectionery.

What is Cadbury's claim based on?

Cadbury Snowballs first launched in the UK in 1966. The product has been sold in its current form, as packs of Mini Snow Balls, since 2023. Those sweets are made from Dairy Milk chocolate covered in a crispy shell of white icing sugar.

Moo Free says it had been selling its Snowballs for roughly two years before Mondelēz demanded an immediate halt to sales.

A second vegan brand in Mondelēz's crosshairs

The dispute follows another Mondelēz legal action, launched days earlier, against Catherine's Originals. That case accuses the small vegan chocolate brand of copying Toblerone's famous chunky shape with its O'bar.

The pattern matters for small producers. Two vegan chocolatiers now face pressure from the same multinational in a single month, each over visual or naming conventions common in the confectionery aisle.

What does Moo Free's founder say?

Mike Jessop co-founded Moo Free in Devon in 2010, after he and his wife could not find allergen-free chocolates for Easter or Christmas. The company began selling online, then won listings at Waitrose and later other major supermarkets.

Jessop said he had "never even heard of" Cadbury Snow Balls and could not try one himself because he is lactose intolerant. He was surprised Mondelēz had been so "heavy-handed" in its letter, and he questioned whether a generic term can be trademarked at all.

"It's a snowball, it is not like we are making a Freddo," he said, referring to Cadbury's famous frog-shaped bar.

In a letter to customers, Moo Free wrote: "Moo Free takes intellectual property concerns seriously. However, we do not accept that any infringement has been established and have responded accordingly … We are disappointed to find ourselves in this position, and we stand in solidarity with Catherine's Originals as it addresses its own situation. We hope to resolve these matters appropriately."

How does Mondelēz respond?

A spokesperson for Mondelēz International said: "Cadbury Snow Balls are one of our most popular Christmas products, enjoyed by households across the UK. No legal action has been taken, but we have been in touch with Moo Free to make them aware of our trademark. We are open to reaching an amicable resolution."

The company frames the letter as a notification, not a lawsuit. Moo Free frames it as a demand to clear the shelves at the worst possible moment.

Has the UK fought over snowballs before?

Yes. Tunnock's and Lees of Scotland won legal action against HMRC in 2014 after proving they did not have to pay VAT on their coconut-covered confections, because the treats were deemed sufficiently similar to a cake for an exemption. Snowballs made by those two suppliers, defined as "a dome of marshmallow coated in any combination" of chocolate, sugar strands, carob, cocoa or coconut, were subsequently given their own VAT-free status.

That case settled a tax question. This one tests how far a single word, registered in 2001, can reach across a market that now includes dairy-free rivals. The outcome will signal how much room small vegan brands have to use familiar festive names on British shelves.