EUIPO Opposition Division Decision on the Chanel No. 5 Bottle: Low Similarity, High Reputation

In a decision dated 9 October 2026, the EUIPO Opposition Division upheld Chanel SAS’s opposition against a three-dimensional EU trade mark application filed by Romania-based Chaos Perfumes and rejected the application for all the contested goods. The decision is not final: as stated in the decision, any party adversely affected may appeal to the EUIPO Boards of Appeal within two months of the date of notification.

The application, filed on 8 April 2024, concerned a white-and-gold perfume bottle bearing the words “CHAOS ANGELIC TOUCH EAU DE LIGHT”. Chanel’s opposition was based on several earlier rights, including French trade mark registration No. 4 286 540 protecting the bottle shape, and on Article 8(1)(b) and Article 8(5) EUTMR. For reasons of procedural economy, the Office first examined the French registration. Since the opposition succeeded under Article 8(5) on the basis of that registration, the remaining earlier rights and grounds were not examined.

The signs compared (from the EUIPO decision)

A container or a trade mark?

The applicant requested proof that the earlier mark had been put to genuine use in France between 8 April 2019 and 7 April 2024, arguing that consumers perceive packaging as a means of containing the goods rather than as an indication of commercial origin. The Office disagreed. In its view, the bottle shape had been repeatedly and prominently presented in advertising, press coverage and retail installations, and its use together with the word elements “CHANEL” and “N°5” did not affect its recognisability. Genuine use was found to be proven for at least perfumes.

The 72% survey

The applicant argued that the evidence demonstrated the reputation of Chanel’s fragrances and brand rather than of the bottle shape, and that a design which was innovative in 1921 had since become commonplace. In support, it submitted a decision of the Supreme Court of Lithuania rejecting Chanel’s three-dimensional bottle for lack of distinctiveness.

The Office nevertheless found that the bottle shape enjoys a significant degree of reputation in France for perfumes. Particular weight was given to a market survey conducted by an independent company in France in May 2016 among 2,438 women aged 16 to 60: when shown the bottle without any branding, 72% of respondents spontaneously associated it with Chanel. The Office also took into account roughly a century of use, advertising campaigns in which the bottle was prominently featured, exhibitions, works by Andy Warhol, and press articles describing the bottle as “iconic”. A 2001 judgment of the Paris Court of Appeal, which described the reputation of another French trade mark consisting of the same bottle shape as “undisputed”, was considered as supporting evidence.

Low similarity, strong reputation

The Office accepted that the earlier mark, consisting of the shape of a perfume container, has a low degree of inherent distinctiveness, and noted that the word elements, colours and label of the contested sign have no counterpart in the earlier mark. However, both bottles share a compact rectangular body, rounded corners, a short central neck and a broad, flattened stopper wider than the neck. The signs were found to be visually and conceptually similar to a low degree.

Nevertheless, taking into account that the goods are identical, that they would appear side by side at the point of sale, and that the bottle shape is recognisable to French consumers even without word elements, the Office concluded that consumers would establish a mental link between the signs. According to the Office, the contested sign would receive an unfair “boost” from that link and would be easier to remember and recognise thanks to Chanel’s efforts. This was considered to take unfair advantage of the repute of the earlier mark, and the opposition was upheld under Article 8(5) EUTMR. The decision was based on a single French registration and on reputation in France, and the EU application was rejected in its entirety.

The position in Türkiye

Article 6(5) of the Turkish Industrial Property Law No. 6769 provides similar protection. Under this provision, an application shall be refused upon opposition by the owner of the earlier mark, even for different goods or services, where use without due cause would take unfair advantage of the earlier mark owing to its level of reputation, or would be detrimental to its repute or distinctive character.

Source: EUIPO Opposition Division, decision of 09/10/2026, Opposition No. B 3 224 379 (Chanel SAS v Chaos Perfumes), EU trade mark application No. 19 010 279.

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

Can the shape of a product or its packaging be registered as a trade mark?

Yes. Under Article 4 EUTMR, a trade mark may consist of any signs, including the shape of goods or of the packaging of goods, provided that they are capable of distinguishing the goods or services of one undertaking from those of other undertakings and of being represented on the register. Article 4 of the Turkish Industrial Property Law No. 6769 takes the same approach.

Can any shape be registered?

No. Under Article 7(1)(e) EUTMR, signs consisting exclusively of a shape (or another characteristic) which results from the nature of the goods, which is necessary to obtain a technical result, or which gives substantial value to the goods cannot be registered. Article 5(1)(e) of the Turkish law is to the same effect. Signs devoid of distinctive character are also refused under Article 7(1)(b) EUTMR.

Is a reputed trade mark protected against applications for different goods?

Yes. Under Article 8(5) EUTMR, an application shall be refused upon opposition, irrespective of whether the goods or services are identical, similar or dissimilar, where the earlier mark has a reputation and use of the later mark without due cause would take unfair advantage of, or be detrimental to, the distinctive character or the repute of the earlier mark. Article 6(5) of the Turkish Industrial Property Law No. 6769 provides similar protection.