Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 15 March 2023 –  
Novartis v EUIPO – AstraZeneca (BREZTRI)

(Case T‑175/22) (
[1](#t-ECR_62022TJ0175_INF_EN_01-E0001)
)

(EU trade mark – Invalidity proceedings – EU word mark BREZTRI – Earlier EU word marks ONBREZ, BREZILIZER and BREEZHALER – No likelihood of confusion – Lack of enhanced distinctiveness of the earlier marks – Article 60(1)(a) and Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 – Article 27(3)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2018/625)

| 1. | EU trade mark – Surrender, revocation and invalidity – Relative grounds for invalidity – Existence of an identical or similar earlier mark registered for identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Enhanced distinctiveness of the earlier mark – Criteria for assessment  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Arts 8(1)(b) and 60(1)(a))  (see paragraphs 15, 16, 74-77, 88, 89, 94) |

| 2. | EU trade mark – Surrender, revocation and invalidity – Relative grounds for invalidity – Existence of an identical or similar earlier 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  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Arts 8(1)(b) and 60(1)(a))  (see paragraphs 18, 22, 91) |

| 3. | EU trade mark – Surrender, revocation and invalidity – Relative grounds for invalidity – Existence of an identical or similar earlier mark registered for identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Word mark BREZTRI – Word marks ONBREZ, BREZILIZER and BREEZHALER  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Arts 8(1)(b) and 60(1)(a))  (see paragraphs 25, 39, 48, 50, 52, 61, 63, 65, 82-84, 101) |

| 4. | EU trade mark – Surrender, revocation and invalidity – Relative grounds for invalidity – Existence of an identical or similar earlier mark registered for identical or similar goods or services – Similarity of the marks concerned – Criteria for assessment – Composite mark – Assessment of the distinctive character of an element of which a trade mark is composed  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Arts 8(1)(b) and 60(1)(a))  (see paragraphs 26, 29, 30, 38, 47, 51) |

| 5. | EU trade mark – Decisions of EUIPO – Legality – Examination by the EU judicature – Criteria  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001)  (see paragraph 37) |

| 6. | EU trade mark – Surrender, revocation and invalidity – Relative grounds for invalidity – Existence of an identical or similar earlier mark registered for identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Likelihood of association – Earlier marks exhibiting characteristics enabling them to be regarded as forming part of the same series or family – Conditions  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Arts 8(1)(b) and 60(1)(a))  (see paragraphs 97-99) |

Operative part

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |

| 2. | Orders Novartis AG to pay the costs. |

---

(
[1](#c-ECR_62022TJ0175_INF_EN_01-E0001)
) [OJ C 207, 23.5.2022](./../../../legal-content/EN/AUTO/?uri=OJ:C:2022:207:TOC).

[Top](#document1)