Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62015TA0678

    Joined Cases T-678/15 and T-679/15: Judgment of the General Court of 15 December 2016 — Novartis v EUIPO (Representation of a grey curve and representation of a green curve) (EU trade mark — Applications for EU figurative trade marks representing a grey curve and representing a green curve — Absolute ground for refusal — Distinctive character — Simplicity of the sign — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

    OJ C 38, 6.2.2017, p. 32–33 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    6.2.2017   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 38/32


    Judgment of the General Court of 15 December 2016 — Novartis v EUIPO (Representation of a grey curve and representation of a green curve)

    (Joined Cases T-678/15 and T-679/15) (1)

    ((EU trade mark - Applications for EU figurative trade marks representing a grey curve and representing a green curve - Absolute ground for refusal - Distinctive character - Simplicity of the sign - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

    (2017/C 038/44)

    Language of the case: English

    Parties

    Applicant: Novartis AG (Basel, Switzerland) (represented by: M. Zintler, lawyer)

    Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: H. Kunz and S. Hanne, Agents)

    Re:

    Two actions brought against the decisions of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 23 September 2015 (Cases R 78/2015-5 and R 89/2015-5), concerning applications for registration of two figurative signs, representing a grey curve and representing a green curve, as EU trade marks.

    Operative part of the judgment

    The Court:

    1.

    Annuls the decisions of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 23 September 2015 (Cases R 78/2015-5 and R 89/2015-5);

    2.

    Allows the appeals brought by Novartis AG before that Board of Appeal;

    3.

    Orders EUIPO to pay the costs.


    (1)  OJ C 90, 7.3.2016.


    Top