Search
× Search

Baza informacij za delovanje Partnerjev Mreže Modro Poslovanje

0 0

CELEX:62025CO0598_INF: Order of the Court (Chamber determining whether appeals may proceed) of 19 January 2026.#Kurt Hesse v Ferrari SpA and European Union Intellectual Property Office.#Appeal – EU trade mark – Determination as to whether appeals should be allowed to proceed – Article 170b of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Request failing to demonstrate that an issue is significant with respect to the unity, consistency or development of EU law – Refusal to allow the appeal to proceed.#Case C-598/25 P.

0 0

CELEX:62025CO0610:           Ordonnance de la Cour (chambre d’admission des pourvois du 15 décembre 2025.#Abacus Research AG contre Office de l’Union européenne pour la propriété intellectuelle (EUIPO).#Pourvoi – Marque de l’Union européenne – Admission des pourvois – Article 170 ter du règlement de procédure de la Cour – Demande ne démontrant pas l’importance d’une question pour l’unité, la cohérence ou le développement du droit de l’Union – Non-admission du pourvoi.#Affaire C-610/25 P.

This document does not exist in English.
0 0

CELEX:62025CO0619: Order of the Court of 3 February 2026.#Guangzhou Wanglaoji Grand Health Co. Ltd v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#Appeal – EU trade mark – Determination as to whether appeals should be allowed to proceed – Article 170b of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Request failing to demonstrate that an issue is significant with respect to the unity, consistency or development of EU law – Refusal to allow the appeal to proceed.#Case C-619/25 P.

0 0

CELEX:62025CO0619_INF: Order of the Court of 3 February 2026.#Guangzhou Wanglaoji Grand Health Co. Ltd v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#Appeal – EU trade mark – Determination as to whether appeals should be allowed to proceed – Article 170b of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Request failing to demonstrate that an issue is significant with respect to the unity, consistency or development of EU law – Refusal to allow the appeal to proceed.#Case C-619/25 P.

0 0

CELEX:62025CO0620: Order of the Court of 3 February 2026.#Guangzhou Wanglaoji Grand Health Co. Ltd v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#Appeal – EU trade mark – Determination as to whether appeals should be allowed to proceed – Article 170b of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Request failing to demonstrate that an issue is significant with respect to the unity, consistency or development of EU law – Refusal to allow the appeal to proceed.#Case C-620/25 P.

0 0

CELEX:62025CO0620_INF: Order of the Court of 3 February 2026.#Guangzhou Wanglaoji Grand Health Co. Ltd v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#Appeal – EU trade mark – Determination as to whether appeals should be allowed to proceed – Article 170b of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Request failing to demonstrate that an issue is significant with respect to the unity, consistency or development of EU law – Refusal to allow the appeal to proceed.#Case C-620/25 P.

0 0

CELEX:62025CO0624:           Ordonnance de la Cour (neuvième chambre) du 20 avril 2026.#Miguel Ángel Navarro Riofrío contre Royaume d'Espagne.#Pourvoi – Article 181 du règlement de procédure de la Cour – Recours en responsabilité non contractuelle dirigé contre un État membre – Incompétence manifeste des juridictions de l’Union européenne – Recours en manquement d’un État membre introduit par un particulier – Pourvoi manifestement non fondé.#Affaire C-624/25 P.

This document does not exist in English.
RSS
First30433044304530463048305030513052Last

Poišči članke o davkih v bazi Modro poslovanje

Terms Of UsePrivacy StatementCopyright 2014-2014 by Srobotnik d.o.o.
Back To Top