Order;Information — ECLI:EU:C:2020:882
Date: 2020-10-29
Language of the case: English
Subject matter: Trade marks;Intellectual, industrial and commercial property
Procedure: Action for annulment;Appeal - inadmissible
Origin: Luxembourg

Order of the Court (Chamber determining whether appeals may proceed) of 29 October 2020 – Kerry Luxembourg v EUIPO (Case C‑305/20 P) (Appeal – EU trade mark – Determination as to whether appeals should be allowed to proceed – Article 170b 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. 11) 2. Appeal – Preliminary admission scheme – Request that an appeal be allowed to proceed – Formal requirements (Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58a; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Arts 170a and 170b) (see paras 12-14) 3. Appeal – Preliminary admission scheme – 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 demonstrate 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, Arts 170a and 170b) (see paras 15, 16, 21) 4. EU trade mark – Procedural provisions – Examination of the facts of the Office’s own motion – Scope – Obligation to prove matters within common knowledge – No such obligation – Dispute before the General Court – Submission of documents to demonstrate the accuracy of a well-known fact (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 76(1)) (see para. 17) 5. Appeal – Preliminary admission scheme – 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 – Precluded (Art. 256(1) TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para., and 58a; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 170b) (see para. 18) 6. Appeal – Preliminary admission scheme – Issue that is significant with respect to the unity, consistency or development of EU law – Incompatibility with the case-law of the Court – Request that the appeal be allowed to proceed failing to demonstrate 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, Arts 170a(1) and 170b) (see para. 20) Operative part 1. The appeal is not allowed to proceed. 2. Kerry Luxembourg Sàrl shall bear its own costs.