Can You Sue a Competitor for Bidding on Your Brand Name?

You've just discovered that a competitor is buying your brand name as a Google Ads keyword. Their ad appears above your organic listing every time someone searches for your business. It feels wrong. It feels like it should be illegal. And your first instinct might be to call a solicitor.

Before you do, it's worth understanding what the law actually says — because the legal position on brand bidding is more nuanced than most business owners realise.

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. If you're considering legal action, consult a qualified solicitor.

Is bidding on a competitor's brand name legal?

The short answer: yes, in most cases. Google explicitly allows advertisers to bid on any keyword, including trademarked terms. This has been Google's policy since 2008 in the UK and EU, and it has been tested extensively in court.

The distinction that matters is between keyword targeting and ad copy. Bidding on a competitor's brand name as a keyword is generally legal. Using a competitor's trademarked name in your ad text is where you start running into legal problems.

This distinction is critical. A competitor who bids on "Acme Software" as a keyword but writes an ad promoting their own product under their own name is doing something fundamentally different from a competitor who writes "Better Than Acme Software" in their headline.

The landmark case: Interflora v Marks & Spencer

The most significant UK case on brand bidding is Interflora Inc v Marks and Spencer plc, which wound through the courts from 2009 to 2014. It's worth understanding because it shaped the legal framework that still applies today.

Marks & Spencer was bidding on "Interflora" and related keywords in Google Ads. When someone searched for Interflora, they would see M&S flower delivery ads. Interflora argued this constituted trademark infringement.

The case was referred to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), which established a key principle: bidding on a competitor's trademark as a keyword is not automatically trademark infringement. Infringement only occurs if the resulting ad does not allow a reasonably well-informed internet user to determine whether the goods or services advertised originate from the trademark proprietor, an undertaking economically connected to it, or a third party.

In practical terms, this means the test is about consumer confusion. If a reasonable person searching for "Interflora" would see the M&S ad and mistakenly believe M&S was part of the Interflora network, that could constitute infringement. If it was clear that M&S was simply an alternative flower delivery service, it likely would not.

The case eventually settled, but the legal principles established remain the foundation of UK and EU law on this issue.

When brand bidding crosses the legal line

Based on the Interflora ruling and subsequent case law, brand bidding becomes legally actionable in several specific scenarios.

Misleading ad copy

If a competitor uses your trademarked brand name in their ad copy in a way that creates confusion about the origin of their goods or services, this may constitute trademark infringement under the Trade Marks Act 1994 (Section 10).

For example, if a competitor's ad says "Official Acme Software Partner" when they have no such relationship, that is potentially actionable — not just as trademark infringement but also as misleading advertising under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008.

Passing off

Even without a registered trademark, you may have a claim for passing off if a competitor's advertising creates a false impression of a connection between their business and yours. Passing off requires three elements: goodwill in your brand, a misrepresentation by the competitor, and damage to your business as a result.

Brand bidding alone rarely satisfies these elements. But brand bidding combined with ad copy that implies an association — using similar branding, claiming to be an authorised reseller, or mimicking your company's name — could support a passing off claim.

Use of trademarks in display URLs

Google Ads allows advertisers to customise their display URL paths. If a competitor includes your trademarked name in their display URL (e.g., "competitor.com/acme-alternative"), this could be considered trademark use in advertising, which is a stronger basis for legal action than keyword bidding alone.

What Google's own trademark policy covers

Before considering legal action, it's worth understanding what Google will handle through its own trademark complaint process.

Google has a specific trademark complaint procedure. If you hold a registered trademark, you can submit a complaint to Google. If Google finds that an advertiser is using your trademark in their ad text, Google may restrict the advertiser from including your trademark in their ads.

However, Google will not prevent an advertiser from bidding on your trademark as a keyword. The policy only covers trademark use in ad copy — specifically in the ad title, description, and display URL.

This is an important distinction. Filing a Google trademark complaint is a practical first step that can resolve the most egregious cases without legal costs, but it won't stop a competitor from targeting your brand as a keyword.

To file a complaint, you'll need your trademark registration details and evidence of the infringing ads. Google typically responds within a few weeks.

Practical steps before considering litigation

Litigation is expensive, time-consuming, and uncertain. Before engaging a solicitor, there are several practical steps that may resolve the situation.

1. Gather evidence systematically

If you're going to take any kind of action — whether a Google complaint, a cease and desist letter, or legal proceedings — you need solid evidence. This means:

• Screenshots of the competitor's ads appearing on your brand searches, with timestamps
• Records of the ad copy used, including headlines, descriptions, and display URLs
• Documentation showing when the behaviour started and how frequently it occurs
• Any evidence of consumer confusion (customer enquiries, misdirected calls, etc.)

Tools like SerpAlert's brand monitoring can automate this evidence gathering, providing timestamped records of competitor ads on your brand keywords that are suitable for legal proceedings.

2. File a Google trademark complaint

If the competitor is using your trademark in their ad copy, file a complaint with Google through their Advertising Policies help centre. This is free and can resolve ad copy violations without legal costs.

3. Send a cease and desist letter

A well-crafted cease and desist letter can resolve many brand bidding disputes without court proceedings. It puts the competitor on formal notice and creates a paper trail if you do need to escalate. We cover this in detail in our guide on writing a cease and desist letter for brand bidding.

4. Contact the competitor directly

Sometimes brand bidding happens through broad match keyword expansion rather than deliberate targeting. A direct, professional approach can sometimes resolve the issue quickly. The competitor's PPC manager may not even be aware their campaigns are showing on your brand terms.

5. Strengthen your own brand campaigns

While pursuing the above steps, make sure your own brand campaigns are properly structured. Bid on your own brand terms, use ad extensions to maximise your ad real estate, and ensure your Quality Score on brand terms is as high as possible. This won't stop a competitor from bidding, but it can push their ads further down the page and reduce the impact on your traffic.

You can use our brand bidding cost calculator to estimate how much a competitor's brand bidding might be costing you — and whether the potential damages justify the cost of legal action.

When to consult a solicitor

There are specific situations where legal advice becomes necessary:

• The competitor is using your trademark in their ad copy and has not stopped after a Google complaint and cease and desist letter
• The ads are clearly misleading, implying an association or endorsement that doesn't exist
• You can demonstrate measurable financial loss directly attributable to the competitor's advertising
• The behaviour is part of a broader pattern of unfair competition or passing off
• You have a strong trademark — registered, distinctive, and well-known in your sector

When you do engage a solicitor, come prepared with your evidence package. Timestamped screenshots, ad copy records, and traffic impact data will make the initial consultation far more productive — and help your solicitor assess the strength of your case quickly.

The commercial reality

Even when you have a viable legal claim, it's worth considering the commercial reality. Trademark litigation in the UK typically costs tens of thousands of pounds, takes months or years, and outcomes are uncertain. The Interflora case ran for five years before settling.

For most businesses, a combination of Google trademark complaints, cease and desist letters, and strong defensive brand campaigns provides a more practical and cost-effective response than litigation.

Legal action should be reserved for cases where the competitor's behaviour is clearly crossing the line — using your trademark in misleading ad copy, implying a false association, or refusing to stop after formal requests.

Key takeaways

• Bidding on a competitor's brand name as a keyword is generally legal in the UK and EU
• Using a competitor's trademark in ad copy is restricted and may constitute infringement
• The legal test is whether ads create confusion about the origin of goods or services
• Google's trademark complaint process can address ad copy violations at no cost
• Evidence gathering is essential regardless of which route you pursue
• Litigation should be a last resort after exhausting practical alternatives

The law in this area continues to evolve. Court decisions, changes to Google's policies, and new regulations can all shift the landscape. Whatever action you take, start by documenting the problem thoroughly and working through the least costly remedies first.

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Always consult a qualified solicitor before taking legal action.