Information;Order — ECLI:EU:C:2020:968
Date: 2020-11-26
Language of the case: English
Subject matter: Trade marks;Intellectual, industrial and commercial property
Procedure: Action for annulment;Appeal - inadmissible
Origin: Lithuania

Order of the Court (Chamber determining whether appeals may proceed) of 26 November 2020 – Scorify v EUIPO (Case C‑418/20 P) (Appeal – EU trade mark – Prior 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) 1. Appeal – Preliminary admission scheme – 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. 17) 2. Appeal – Preliminary admission scheme – Request for an appeal to 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 18-20) 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 (Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58a; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 170b) (see paras 21-26) Operative part 1. The appeal is not allowed to proceed. 2. Scorify UAB shall bear its own costs.