Information;Order — ECLI:EU:C:2020:406
Date: 2020-05-28
Language of the case: Polish
Subject matter: Trade marks;Intellectual, industrial and commercial property
Procedure: Action for annulment;Appeal - inadmissible
Origin: Poland

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.