Judgment — ECLI:EU:T:2018:592
Date: 2018-09-25
Language of the case: English
Court formation: Third Chamber
Subject matter: Trade marks;Intellectual, industrial and commercial property
Procedure: Action for annulment - unfounded

Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 25 September 2018 – Novartis v EUIPO — Chiesi Farmaceutici (AKANTO) (Case T‑182/17) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU word mark AKANTO — Earlier EU word mark KANTOS — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)) 1. EU trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark — Relative grounds for refusal — Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services — Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark — Criteria for assessment (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 16, 17, 60) 2. EU trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark — Relative grounds for refusal — Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services — Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark — Assessment of the likelihood of confusion — Determination of the relevant public — Attention level of the public — Medicinal products (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 19, 21) 3. EU trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark — Relative grounds for refusal — Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services — Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark — Word marks AKANTO and KANTOS (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 22, 30-35, 41, 42, 51, 64-67) 4. EU trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark — Relative grounds for refusal — Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services — Similarity between the goods or services in question — Criteria for assessment (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see para. 23) 5. EU trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark — Relative grounds for refusal — Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services — Similarity of the marks concerned — Criteria for assessment (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see para. 26) 6. EU trade mark — Decisions of the Office — Principle of equal treatment — Principle of sound administration — EUIPO’s previous decision-making practice — Principle of legality — Need for a strict and complete examination in each particular case (Council Regulation No 207/2009) (see paras 56-58) Re: Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 9 January 2017 (Case R 531/2016-1) relating to opposition proceedings between Chiesi Farmaceutici and Novartis. Operative part The Court: 1. Dismisses the action; 2. Orders Novartis AG to pay the costs. 2. Orders Novartis AG to pay the costs.