The Day Lalique Erased Me: How a Luxury Brand Discriminated Against Me for Advocating for Palestine

I created a fragrance to celebrate my heritage. Instead, I was removed because I wouldn't be silent about Palestine.

When Guy Oliver first approached me in 2022 with the idea of creating a fragrance for the Turquoise Mountain Candle, I felt a profound sense of purpose. This was not just another commercial project. This was an opportunity to contribute to a charity working directly with Palestinian artisan communities, to tell a story about Jordanian heritage, and to be part of something larger than myself.

I am a British-Jordanian. My heritage matters to me. The opportunity to create a product that celebrated that heritage while supporting communities in the Middle East felt meaningful in a way that most commercial work simply does not.

I said yes immediately.

The Work

Over the next two years, I invested myself completely in this project. I am a fragrance formulator, but I am also a doctor. I understand precision, methodology, and the importance of getting things right. This was not casual work.

I started from scratch. I sourced specialist fragrance oils at my own expense — £2,500 in materials alone. I formulated the initial scent, then reformulated it multiple times when Lalique's chosen wax blend proved incompatible with my original oil. That incompatibility was not my mistake; it was proprietary wax with no flexibility on composition. But I solved it. I spent weeks testing different concentrations and blends until we had something that worked.

I calculated IFRA safety compliance by hand. I prepared the regulatory Safety Data Sheets and allergen declarations that are required by law before any fragrance can be legally sold. I liaised across multiple countries with Lalique's manufacturers, answering technical questions at all hours, solving problems as they arose.

Approximately 100 hours of professional work. Skilled work. The kind of work that takes experience and expertise to do properly.

And I did it because I believed in the project.

The fragrance was beautiful. Lalique's own in-house fragrance team assessed it, complemented it, and formally signed it off. Their specialists approved what I had created. This was not amateur work being accepted out of charity. This was professional work meeting professional standards.

By late 2024, everything was ready. The candle was approved for production. 1,674 units were manufactured. The packaging was designed with my name prominently featured as the fragrance creator. The story was told: a Jordanian heritage collaboration with a named perfumer of Jordanian descent, supporting a charity working with Palestinian communities.

It was a good story. It was a true story.

The Launch

The candle launched in October 2025. I was proud. I had contributed something real to the world — not just a fragrance, but a narrative, a connection to heritage, a contribution to a cause I cared about.

Then in March 2025, before I had even received payment or formal acknowledgment of the arrangement, my name was removed.

No notice. No consultation. No explanation. It simply vanished from the packaging.

When I asked why, Guy Oliver gave me a false explanation. He said it was because of my employment tribunal case against the NHS and my association with the royal family through the Turquoise Mountain Foundation.

That made no sense. But I accepted it because I did not have all the information.

The Truth

What I eventually discovered, through Lalique's own legal team's disclosure, was the actual reason.

In an internal email dated 5 October 2025, Frederick Fischer, Lalique's Managing Director, wrote to his staff:

"Nadeem Crowe, the maker of the scent, is officially campaigning for Palestine and we CANNOT be politically involved in our products."

That was it. That was why my name was removed from a product I had spent two years creating. That was why a product bearing a royal charity's name — a charity that operates directly in Palestine supporting Palestinian artisan communities — had its Jordanian creator's name erased.

Because I advocate for Palestine.

The email also revealed that Fischer personally oversaw this decision. He was not delegating it. He was personally arranging new photography "with no names" to replace the original packaging that featured my contribution. The Managing Director of a luxury French brand personally managed the process of erasing me.

When I read those words — "officially campaigning for Palestine and we CANNOT be politically involved" — I felt something shift inside me. Not just anger, though there was that. But a kind of clarity.

This was not a commercial decision. This was discrimination.

The Asymmetry

But here is what made it worse. While Lalique was removing my name citing political neutrality, they were simultaneously maintaining and actively promoting a named collaboration with Israeli architect Irma Orenstein.

I did my research. According to a January 2018 Jerusalem Post profile, Orenstein explicitly describes her architectural practice as Zionist in purpose. She designs luxury apartments for Diaspora Jews to encourage them to immigrate to Israel and become, in her own words, "ambassadors for us." Her clients are described as "all Zionists." They are major supporters of Israeli military organisations and the Israeli state.

Lalique actively promotes this collaboration on their website. They celebrate it. They feature it.

So let me be clear about what happened: Lalique removed a collaborator's name because he advocates for Palestinian rights, while simultaneously promoting an architect engaged in explicit political work for the Israeli state.

This is not political neutrality. This is discriminatory application of political criteria based on which side of a geopolitical question you advocate for.

The Attempt to Resolve

I tried to resolve this fairly. I requested written terms. I requested payment. I requested an NDA. All requests were declined in favour of continued informal conversations.

When that did not work, I engaged a specialist barrister at Doughty Street Chambers. I submitted a detailed settlement proposal of £50,000, documented with every component of my claim. I gave Lalique multiple opportunities to engage substantively.

Their response was consistent refusal. Their solicitors rejected my proposal without addressing any of my arguments. They threatened costs action. They indicated they would vigorously defend any proceedings.

The message was clear: they were not going to settle. They were not going to acknowledge what they had done. They were prepared to fight.

Why I Am Going Public

I did not want it to come to this. I genuinely did not. I wanted to resolve this privately, fairly, with minimal fuss. I wanted Lalique to do the right thing and move on.

They refused.

So now I am telling the story publicly. Not because I want to damage Lalique, I am David throwing pebbles at Goliath (though in Israel this is enough to get a child shot) — though reputational consequences are the logical outcome of discriminatory conduct. But because this matters. Because the asymmetry between how they treat Palestine advocates and how they treat Israeli political activists matters. Because a product created for a charity supporting Palestinian communities being stripped of its Palestinian creator's name matters.

And because if I do not tell this story, no one will know that Lalique makes these kinds of decisions. No one will understand what happened. No one will see the contradiction between their claimed neutrality and their actual conduct.

The fragrance I created is still in 1,623 unsold candles in Lalique's warehouse, incorporated into a product they own, used commercially without my licence or permission, potentially generating revenue.

My intellectual property. My work. My heritage. Used without consent, without attribution. That is not acceptable.

qWhat Comes Next

I have disclosed this matter to the Turquoise Mountain Foundation board. They have confirmed they were not informed of Lalique's decision to remove the name from a product bearing their charity's identity. That is a governance failure.

I am writing to the King's Private Secretary regarding the conduct of a brand partnered with a royal charity.

I am in the media now. The story is breaking. Journalists have the Fischer email. They have the evidence.

And I am at peace with that. Because I tried to do this the right way. I tried to resolve it privately. Lalique chose contempt over negotiation.

Now they face the consequences.

A Note to Others

If you are reading this and you have experienced discrimination based on your political beliefs or your advocacy, please know: you are not alone. And you have more power than you think.

I am a medical doctor. I have a demanding job. I did not have time for this fight. I did not have money for extended legal battles. I did not have the kind of public platform that makes stories like this easy to tell.

But I had documentation. I had courage. I had a barrister willing to take me seriously. And I had nothing to lose by telling the truth.

That was enough.

It may be enough for you too.

Dr Nadeem Crowe is a British-Jordanian emergency medicine doctor and fragrance formulator based in London. He is currently pursuing an employment tribunal case against Royal Free London NHS Trust for discrimination and harassment. He is represented by Liana Wood of Leigh Day on NHS discrimination law matters. He can be reached at nadeemcrowe@gmail.com.