Order of the Court (Chamber determining whether appeals may proceed) of 28 May 2020 – Currency One v EUIPO
(Case C‑101/20 P)
(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 a significant issue with respect to the unity, consistency or development of EU law – Appeal not allowed to proceed)
1. Appeal – Preliminary admission scheme – Issue that is significant with respect to the unity, consistency or development of EU law – Burden of proof
(Statue of the Court of Justice, Art. 58a; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 170b)
(see para. 12)
2. Appeal – Preliminary admission scheme – Request for an appeal to be allowed to proceed – Formal requirements – Scope
(Statue of the Court of Justice, Art. 58a; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 170a(1) and 170b)
(see paras 13-16)
3. Appeal – Preliminary admission scheme – Issue that is significant with respect to the unity, consistency or development of EU law – Request for the appeal to be allowed to proceed not demonstrating that the issue is significant – Refusal to allow the appeal to proceed
(Statue of the Court of Justice, Art. 58a; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 170a(1) and 170b)
(see paras 17, 19-24)
4. Appeal – Preliminary admission scheme – Issue that is significant with respect to the unity, consistency or development of EU law – Contrary to the Court’s case-law – Refusal to allow the appeal to proceed
(Statue of the Court of Justice, Art. 58a; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 170b(1))
(see para. 18)
Operative part
1. | | The appeal is not allowed to proceed. |
2. | | Currency One S.A. shall bear its own costs. |