Glaxo Wellcome UK Ltd (t/a Allen & Hanburys) & Anor v Sandoz Ltd

Glaxo Wellcome UK Ltd (t/a Allen & Hanburys) & Anor v Sandoz Ltd

The trade mark registration lacks the clarity, precision, specificity, and uniformity required by Article 4 of EUTMR, leaving the public uncertain as to the protected sign and giving Glaxo an unfair competitive advantage. The mark is therefore invalid.

Parties
Claimant/appellant: Glaxo Wellcome UK Ltd (t/a Allen & Hanburys); Claimant/appellant: Glaxo Group Ltd; Defendant/respondent: Sandoz Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 May 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Summary Judgment in High Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; summary judgment for respondent upheld.
Legal Topics
EU Trade Mark Regulation, Graphical Representation, Colour Marks, Precision and Clarity in Registration
Intellectual Property Trademark Law EU Trade Mark Regulation Graphical Representation Colour Marks Precision and Clarity in Registration

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Glaxo Wellcome UK Ltd (t/a Allen & Hanburys)

Claimant/appellant

Glaxo Group Ltd

Claimant/appellant

Sandoz Ltd

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Summary Judgment in High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the EU trade mark registration is invalid for lack of clarity, precision, and uniformity under Article 4 of EUTMR
  2. 2 Interaction between pictorial representation and verbal description in colour per se marks
  3. 3 Whether the mark gives an unfair competitive advantage due to uncertainty

Ratio Decidendi

The trade mark registration lacks the clarity, precision, specificity, and uniformity required by Article 4 of EUTMR, leaving the public uncertain as to the protected sign and giving Glaxo an unfair competitive advantage. The mark is therefore invalid.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; summary judgment for respondent upheld.

Orders

  • Trade Mark declared invalid.
  • Claim for infringement dismissed.