februar 25, 2026 0 0 CELEX:62023TJ1180_RES: Judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) of 25 February 2026.#BW v European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation and European Union Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation.#Cooperation between police authorities and other law enforcement agencies of Member States – Sky ECC encrypted communications service – Alleged unlawful processing of personal data – Action for annulment – Act not subject to review – Preparatory act – Admissibility – Processing of personal data by Member States and transfer of such data to Europol – Transfer of personal data by Europol to a Member State – Transfer of personal data from Eurojust to a third country – Non-contractual liability – Article 50 of Regulation (EU) 2016/794 – Joint and several liability of Europol and the Membe
februar 11, 2026 0 0 CELEX:62023TJ1181: Judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 11 February 2026.#Mylan Ireland Ltd v European Commission.#Medicinal products for human use – Revocation of the marketing authorisation for Dimethyl Fumarate Mylan – dimethyl fumarate, a medicinal product for human use – Directive 2001/83/EC – Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 – Article 266 TFEU.#Case T-1181/23.
februar 11, 2026 0 0 CELEX:62023TJ1182: Judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 11 February 2026.#Neuraxpharm Pharmaceuticals SL v European Commission.#Medicinal products for human use – Revocation of the marketing authorisation for Dimethyl Fumarate Neuraxpharm – dimethyl fumarate, a medicinal product for human use – Directive 2001/83/EC – Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 – Article 266 TFEU.#Case T-1182/23.
februar 11, 2026 0 0 CELEX:62023TJ1183: Judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 11 February 2026.#Zakłady Farmaceutyczne Polpharma S.A. v European Commission.#Medicinal products for human use – Revocation of the marketing authorisation for Dimethyl Fumarate Polpharma – dimethyl fumarate, a medicinal product for human use – Directive 2001/83/EC – Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 – Article 266 TFEU.#Case T-1183/23.
maj 14, 2025 0 0 CELEX:62023TJ1184: Arrêt du Tribunal (dixième chambre) du 14 mai 2025.#LD contre Commission européenne.#Fonction publique – Fonctionnaires – Recrutement – Concours général EPSO/AD/371/19 – Décision de ne pas inscrire le nom du requérant sur la liste de réserve – Régime linguistique – Exception d’illégalité – Égalité de traitement – Obligation de motivation – Confiance légitime.#Affaire T-1184/23. This document does not exist in English.
oktober 25, 2025 0 27 CELEX:62023TJ1184_INF: Judgment of the General Court (Tenth Chamber) of 14 May 2025.#LD v European Commission.#Case T-1184/23.
oktober 25, 2024 0 47 CELEX:62023TJ1185: Judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) of 23 October 2024.#Bimbo, SA v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#Case T-1185/23.
marec 26, 2025 0 0 CELEX:62023TJ1186: Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 26 March 2025.#Unite Network SE v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for EU figurative mark unite mercateo – Earlier national figurative mark UNIDE MARKET SUPERMERCADOS – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001.#Case T-1186/23.
marec 08, 2025 0 0 CELEX:62023TJ1187: Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 5 March 2025.#Funline International Corp. v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#EU trade mark – Revocation proceedings – EU word mark AMSTERDAM POPPERS – Lack of genuine use of the mark – Article 58(1)(a) and (2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 – Action for annulment – Representation by a lawyer – Admissibility.#Case T-1187/23.
julij 31, 2025 0 0 CELEX:62023TJ1187_INF: Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 5 March 2025.#Funline International Corp. v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#EU trade mark – Revocation proceedings – EU word mark AMSTERDAM POPPERS – Lack of genuine use of the mark – Article 58(1)(a) and (2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 – Action for annulment – Representation by a lawyer – Admissibility.#Case T-1187/23.