The latest news, trends, analysis, interviews and podcasts from the global food and beverage industry

Key takeaways:

Legal outcome: Monster Beverage's $311 million victory against Bang Energy upheld by appeals court.

Allegations: Bang accused of false advertising regarding 'Super Creatine'.

Market implications: Highlights competitive practices in the energy drink industry.

Future considerations: Potential impact on advertising standards and regulatory scrutiny in the beverage sector.

Monster Beverage Corporation has successfully upheld a $311 million judgment against Bang Energy and its founder, Jack Owoc. The ruling was confirmed by the ninth US Circuit Court of Appeals on April 15 2025, following allegations that Bang Energy engaged in deceptive marketing practices to gain market share at the expense of Monster.

The case originated in 2018 when Monster accused Bang and Owoc of falsely advertising their products, particularly claiming that their energy drink contained 'Super Creatine,' which was marketed as a remedy for serious neurological disorders, including Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease.

A jury sided with Monster in 2022, concluding that Bang's claims were misleading and that the drink did not contain actual creatine, leading to a substantial damages award.

Following Bang Energy's bankruptcy declaration and subsequent acquisition by Monster for $362 million in 2023, the appeals court's recent decision reinforces the original trial court's findings. Monster's attorney, Allison Libeu, highlighted that the ruling validates the jury's unanimous verdict and the trial court's decisions throughout the proceedings.

Owoc's legal team argued that the trial excluded crucial evidence that could have supported their defense, including allegations of Monster's own misleading advertising tactics. However, the appeals court rejected these claims, stating that the jury had sufficient basis to rule in favour of Monster.

This case highlights ongoing tensions in the competitive energy drink sector, where marketing claims can significantly impact consumer perception and market dynamics. As companies navigate regulatory landscapes and consumer expectations for transparency, this ruling may set a precedent for future advertising practices within the industry.

The case is officially noted as Monster Energy Co v. Vital Pharmaceuticals Inc d/b/a VPX Sports, 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 23-55451.