Jellycat sues copycat high street retailers for 'stealing their designs' and making 'inferior' versions

Published: 23:43, 17 July 2026 | Updated: 23:49, 17 July 2026 Cuddly toy company Jellycat is suing Next and Hamleys over claims they made similar products of ‘inferior quality’ after copying their designs, High Court documents have revealed. Barristers for Jellycat said in court documents that it has two main ranges of cuddly toys: The Loveables range, which is based on animals, and Amuseables, which is based on almost 500 everyday objects and foods. But they claimed a Next cushion and doorstop in the shape of a biscuit and multiple Hamleys plushies in the shape of various food and other items are ‘copied’ from Jellycat’s products. Jellycat said that it was not ‘presently able with confidence to estimate the financial value’ of either claim, but that it believes the value will be ‘substantial’.  It is also seeking injunctions preventing Next and Hamleys from ‘passing off’ their products as Jellycat’s in future. Hamleys is yet to file a defence, but barristers for Next said the retail chain denies ‘that any infringing acts have been carried out’. A hearing in either claim is yet to take place. In written submissions Jellycat’s barrister Stuart Baran said the firm sells in more than 70 countries and more than 11million Amuseables have been sold in the UK. He said that the Next and Hamleys’ products showed a ‘high similarity’ with Jellycat’s products, which amounted to ‘a misrepresentation’ as they could lead customers to believe they are Jellycat’s items.  Cuddly toy company Jellycat is suing Next and Hamleys over claims they made similar products of ‘inferior quality’ after copying their designs, High Court documents have revealed Mr Baran added that both the Next and Hamleys toys were of ‘inferior quality’ to those made by Jellycat, which damaged the company’s reputation and took away sales it would otherwise have made. In Next’s defence to the claim, barrister Ashton Chantrielle said claims that they were copied from Jellycat’s products were ‘wholly unparticularised’, and that allegations Next had passed off its items as Jellycat’s were ‘misconceived’.