Luxury brands invest heavily in creating products that consumers can recognise instantly. A recent decision from the EU Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) highlights the value of protecting distinctive product shapes as trade marks. Chanel successfully opposed a later three-dimensional perfume bottle trade mark application by relying on its registered No. 5 bottle shape, despite the EUIPO finding only a low degree of similarity between the competing designs.
What happened?
In October 2026, the EUIPO upheld Chanel's opposition to a three-dimensional trade mark application filed by Romanian fragrance company, Chaos Perfumes. Chanel argued that the proposed perfume bottle design bore sufficient resemblance to its registered 3D trade mark for the iconic No. 5 bottle and that consumers would establish a link between the two, allowing the applicant to take unfair advantage of the reputation Chanel had built up over decades. The EUIPO agreed and refused the application.
A case won on reputation
The decision was not based on the bottles being identical. The EUIPO acknowledged a number of differences and considered the overall degree of similarity to be relatively low. However, the Office found that consumers could still make a connection between the two designs because they shared several notable characteristics, including a compact rectangular shape, rounded corners, a short neck and a broad stopper.
What ultimately tipped the scales in Chanel's favour was the reputation of its earlier 3D trade mark. Chanel produced evidence that consumers recognised the bottle itself, even without the Chanel branding appearing on it. The evidence produced by Chanel went far beyond sales and advertising figures. It included extensive press coverage, consumer survey evidence showing that 72% of respondents associated the unbranded bottle shape with Chanel, references to the bottle in art, film and exhibitions, and evidence of decades of advertising that prominently featured the bottle itself rather than simply the fragrance sold within it.
The decision is also noteworthy because Chanel was required to prove genuine use of its shape mark. The EUIPO accepted that the bottle shape had been used not merely as packaging for perfume, but as a trade mark in its own right. In reaching that conclusion, the Office relied on evidence showing the bottle being repeatedly featured in advertising campaigns, exhibitions and promotional materials in a way capable of indicating commercial origin.
The UK’s position
The EUIPO placed weight on survey evidence showing that consumers associated the bottle shape with Chanel. By contrast, UK courts have historically taken a more cautious approach to survey evidence, particularly following a number of cases in which consumer surveys were found to add significant cost while providing limited assistance to the court. Whilst survey evidence remains admissible in principle, brand owners seeking to establish reputation before the UK courts will often place greater emphasis on objective evidence such as sales figures, advertising spend, press coverage and market recognition.
That said, it is difficult to see Chanel's claim failing in the UK solely because less weight was given to the survey evidence. The breadth of Chanel's evidence, including decades of use, extensive media recognition and the cultural significance of the No. 5 bottle itself, would likely have provided a strong basis for establishing reputation and consumer recognition before the UK courts.
Lessons for brand owners
The case is a useful reminder that reputation can significantly broaden the scope of protection available to trade mark owners. A relatively low level of similarity may still be enough where a famous mark is capable of triggering a mental link in the mind of consumers. It also highlights the importance of taking a layered and strategic approach to brand protection. Rather than viewing trade marks, designs and other IP rights in isolation, brand owners should consider how different rights can complement one another over the life of a product. Although any design rights in the original No. 5 bottle would have expired decades ago, Chanel's success illustrates the potentially perpetual value of trade mark protection for iconic product shapes that consumers have come to associate with a particular brand.
