Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

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. |

[Top](#document1)