62019CO0588_INF
Order of the Court (Chamber determining whether appeals may proceed) of 7 October 2019 — L’Oréal v EUIPO
(Case C‑588/19 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 — 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 — Inadequate or contradictory grounds — Request that the appeal be allowed to proceed failing to show the significance of the issue — Appeal not allowed to proceed
(Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58a; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 170b)
(see paras 10-12)
2.
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 show the significance of the issue — Appeal not allowed to proceed
(Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58a; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 170b)
(see paras 13, 14, 18)
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 — Incompatibility with the Court’s case-law — Request that the appeal be allowed to proceed failing to show the significance of the issue — Appeal not allowed to proceed
(Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58a; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 170b)
(see paras 15-17)
Operative part
1.
The appeal is not allowed to proceed.
2.
L’Oréal shall bear its own costs.