Aldi Faces Court Losses, Product Recalls And Slipping Customer Satisfaction Across Multiple Markets

Aldi is contending with a series of setbacks spanning copyright infringement rulings, product safety recalls and declining customer satisfaction ratings across its international operations.

The discount supermarket chain has been found liable for copyright infringement by an Australian Federal Court, had a children’s product recalled over choking hazards in Ireland, lost a customer satisfaction title it had held for five years in Australia and drawn growing complaints from shoppers over rising prices and product quality.

Federal Court extends copyright infringement findings

An Australian Federal Court has upheld and extended copyright infringement findings against Aldi over the packaging of its Mamia baby snack range, which was found to have copied designs from Australian baby food brand, Little Bellies.

The Full Court, comprising Justices Burley, Moore and Owens, found that five Aldi Mamia products infringed Little Bellies’ packaging copyright, up from three in the original 2024 trial. The matter has been sent back to the trial judge for the assessment of damages.

The case centred on Aldi’s redesign of its Mamia baby snack range, which launched in 2021. Evidence before the Court established that Aldi’s design agency was provided with Little Bellies packaging as a benchmark to emulate when creating the Mamia range. Internal documents showed Aldi instructed its designers to follow the structure of the Little Bellies products.

When an early design came back too similar, Aldi received feedback that it was “too close” and made modifications to create more distance. The Full Court’s unchallenged finding was that Aldi’s design process was intended to create packaging that resembled Little Bellies’ products while attempting to avoid crossing the legal line.

Rather than undertaking its own independent design process, Aldi set out to obtain the benefit of another company’s creative work, the Court found. It also upheld a finding that Aldi’s conduct was flagrant, a prerequisite for additional damages under Australia’s Copyright Act.

“If Aldi chooses to conduct its business in that manner, it runs the risk that infringement will lead to additional damages,” the Full Court observed.

Little Bellies Co-Founder and Managing Director, Clive Sher, welcomed the outcome.

“We are delighted that the Full Court not only upheld the original judgment of infringement by Aldi but also extended it to five designs instead of three,” Sher commented.

“Taking on a global retailer is not something any independent business does lightly. We pursued this because we believed the principle mattered, and we hope this decision gives other Australian brands greater confidence that their creative work and brand equity can and should be protected.”

The Court noted that Aldi had continued to use the infringing packaging for several months after being sent letters of demand by Little Bellies’ parent company. Neither party was ordered to pay the other’s appeal costs, with the Court finding both sides had mixed results.

Children’s book recalled over choking hazard

Separately, Aldi is one of several retailers affected by a product recall in Ireland involving a children’s board book that poses a choking risk.

Ireland’s Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (CCPC) issued a recall of the Groovy Baby “I Spy a Fly!” board book after finding that the fly’s wings on the last page may detach when pulled, creating a potential choking hazard for young children.

The CCPC confirmed that approximately 1,433 affected products were sold in Ireland through Aldi, TK Maxx and Mulveys House of Gifts in Leitrim. The affected products carry ISBN numbers 9781836422600 and 9788384253960.

The CCPC advised customers to stop using the product immediately and keep it out of the reach of children. Publisher, MBI, is offering refunds to consumers who remove and dispose of the wings according to its instructions, with further details available at makebelieveideas.co.uk/recall-i-spy.

Customers who purchased the book from TK Maxx are directed to return it to any TK Maxx store.

Popular chocolate bar discontinued in the UK

In the UK, Aldi has discontinued its Choceur Dark Chocolate bar, a product that had developed a following among customers of the retailer.

The bar, which contained 45 per cent cocoa solids, was confirmed as discontinued after a customer raised the issue on social media, noting that the dark chocolate variant was frequently the first to sell out.

An Aldi spokesperson confirmed the change.

“We continually review our range of products to make sure we’re meeting the needs of Aldi shoppers,” the spokesperson remarked. “We’ve recently introduced new flavours to our Choceur range, including Cookies & Cream and Peanut Butter, while customers can still choose from a variety of dark chocolate bars.”

The response has not satisfied all customers. One wrote on social media that the replacement product was “not half as good” and called for the original to return.

The discontinuation reflects a broader pattern of complaints from Aldi shoppers about products being removed or reformulated without notice.

Aldi loses fruit and veg satisfaction crown after five years

In Australia, Aldi has lost its five-year hold on Canstar’s Most Satisfied Customers Award for Supermarket Fruit & Veg, with IGA taking the title for 2026.

Canstar surveyed 2,541 supermarket shoppers and awarded IGA five stars for overall satisfaction, freshness of produce, variety and value for money. Aldi placed second, scoring five stars for value for money but only four stars for overall satisfaction, freshness and presentation, and two stars for variety.

Woolworths placed third and Coles fourth.

Canstar’s Consumer Expert, Eden Radford, pointed to cost-of-living pressures as a factor reshaping how Australians shop for fresh produce.

“The data has also shown that for more than one-fifth of those surveyed, trying to save has meant cutting down on the amount of fresh fruit and vegetables consumed altogether,” Radford noted.

The average weekly spend on fresh fruit and vegetables among those surveyed was $32, a 26 per cent drop from the previous year’s figure of $43.

Canstar’s research found that 42 per cent of shoppers buy only what is affordable rather than what they want to eat, 33 per cent are choosing imperfect produce and 25 per cent are switching to frozen because it is cheaper. A further 22 per cent have reduced how much fresh produce they eat altogether.

Twelve per cent of shoppers admitted to reducing the weight of their purchases, such as removing stalks from broccoli, and six per cent admitted to selecting the cheaper version of a more expensive item at the self-checkout.

Rising prices and quality draw growing complaints

Beyond the formal ratings, Aldi is facing growing scrutiny from customers over its pricing and product quality.

Online discussions on platforms such as Reddit have seen regular Aldi shoppers questioning whether the retailer still offers the value it built its reputation on. Common complaints include price increases that have narrowed the gap with competitors, product reformulation, reduced package sizes and issues with produce spoiling faster than expected.

Some customers report that while Aldi remains competitive on staple items such as eggs, cheese and canned goods, its pricing advantage on other products has eroded. One long-time Aldi shopper noted that canned fruit had risen from 89 cents to $1.55, just four cents below the equivalent at Walmart.

Others have raised concerns about product quality and consistency, with complaints about items arriving on shelves close to their expiry dates. One store employee reported that their location was receiving expired products that had to be discarded before they could be shelved.

The retailer’s model of offering a limited range at low prices has also drawn criticism from shoppers who find products frequently going out of stock or being permanently removed from the range.

Aldi has built a significant part of its retail positioning around offering comparable products to established brands at lower prices. However, the Federal Court ruling in Australia underlines the legal risks of this approach when it extends to packaging design, and the broader customer sentiment suggests price and quality gaps with competitors are narrowing in several markets.

Last Updated on September 11, 2026 by Nick Ross