62020CO0386_INF
Order of the Court (Chamber determining whether appeals may proceed) of 21 October 2020 – eSky Group IP v EUIPO
(Case C‑386/20 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 – 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 – Scheme for prior determination as to whether appeals should be allowed to proceed – Significant issue 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. 9)
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 10-12)
3.
Appeal – Scheme for prior determination as to whether appeals should be allowed to proceed – Significant issue 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 – 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 13-15)
Operative part
1.
The appeal is not allowed to proceed.
2.
eSky Group IP sp. z o.o. shall bear its own costs.