Search
× Search

Baza informacij za delovanje Partnerjev Mreže Modro Poslovanje

0 0

CELEX:62025CO0868: Order of the Court of 30 April 2026.#European Lotto and Betting 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 – Appeal 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-868/25 P.

0 0

CELEX:62025CO0872: Order of the Court of 30 June 2026.#European Union Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators v Swissgrid AG.#Appeal – Regulation (EU) 2017/2195 – European Union Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (ACER) – Determination as to whether appeals should be allowed to proceed – Article 170b of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Request demonstrating that an issue is significant with respect to the unity, consistency or development of EU law – Appeal allowed to proceed.#Case C-872/25 P.

0 0

CELEX:62025CO0874: Order of the Court of 24 June 2026.#MeSoFa Vermögensverwaltungs AG v Single Resolution Board.#Appeal – Economic and monetary union – Banking union – Regulation (EU) No 806/2014 – Single Resolution Mechanism for credit institutions and certain investment firms (SRM) – 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-874/25 P.

0 0

CELEX:62025CO0875: Order of the Court of 24 June 2026.#MeSoFa Vermögensverwaltungs AG v Single Resolution Board.#Appeal – Economic and monetary union – Banking union – Regulation (EU) No 806/2014 – Single Resolution Mechanism for credit institutions and certain investment firms (SRM) – 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-875/25 P.

0 0

CELEX:62025TA0003: Case T-3/25: Judgment of the General Court of 19 November 2025 – Zündapp v EUIPO – Longines (Representation of a stylised shield with horizontal bars) (EU trade mark–Opposition proceedings–Application for an EU figurative mark representing a stylised shield with horizontal bars–International registration of the earlier figurative mark representing two extended wings around a rectangle–Relative ground for refusal–No likelihood of confusion–Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001–Similarity of the signs at issue)

0 0

CELEX:62025TA0006: Case T-6/25: Judgment of the General Court of 11 March 2026 – QI v Commission (Civil service – Officials – Psychological harassment – Article 12(a) of the Staff Regulations – Request for assistance – Article 24 of the Staff Regulations – Refusal of request – Substantial new facts that may justify the submission of a request for reconsideration of a previous decision – Prima facie evidence of the alleged psychological harassment – Liability)

RSS
First30473048304930503052305430553056Last

Poišči članke o davkih v bazi Modro poslovanje

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