Order of the Court (Chamber determining whether appeals may proceed) of 16 July 2020 – Fabryki Mebli “Forte” v Bog-Fran
(Case C‑183/20 P)
(Appeal – Community design – Whether appeals may 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 – Appeal not allowed to proceed)
1. Appeal – Scheme for prior determination as to whether appeals should be allowed to proceed – Issue that is significant with respect to the unity, consistency or development of EU law – Burden of proof
(Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58a; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 170b)
(see para. 13)
2. Appeal – Scheme for prior determination as to whether appeals should be allowed to proceed – Request that an appeal be allowed to proceed – Formal requirements – Scope
(Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58a; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Arts 170a and 170b)
(see paras 14-17)
3. Appeal – Scheme for prior determination as to whether appeals should be allowed to proceed – Issue that is significant with respect to the unity, consistency or development of EU law – Request that the appeal be allowed to proceed failing to show the significance of the issue – Appeal not allowed to proceed
(Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58a; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Arts 170a and 170b)
(see paras 18, 20-26)
4. Appeal – Scheme for prior determination as to whether appeals should be allowed to proceed – Issue that is significant with respect to the unity, consistency or development of EU law – Review by the Court of the assessment of the facts and evidence – Not included
(Art. 256(1) TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para., and 58a; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Arts 170a and 170b)
(see para. 19)
Operative part
1. | | The appeal is not allowed to proceed. |
2. | | Fabryki Mebli “Forte” S.A. shall bear its own costs. |