Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

Order of the Court (Chamber determining whether appeals may proceed) of 23 March 2023 – G-Core Innovations v EUIPO

(Case C‑732/22 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 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 – Scheme for prior determination as to whether appeals should be allowed to proceed – 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, Arts 170a(1) and 170b)  (see paragraph 10) |

| 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(1) and 170b)  (see paragraphs 11, 12) |

| 3. | Appeal – Scheme for prior determination as to whether appeals should be allowed to proceed – Issue that is significant with respect to the unity, consistency or development of EU law – Inadequate or contradictory grounds – Request that an appeal be allowed to proceed failing to demonstrate that the issue is significant – Request that an appeal be allowed to proceed failing to demonstrate the effect of the errors of law allegedly made by the General Court on the outcome of the decision under appeal – Appeal not allowed to proceed  (Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58a; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Arts 170a(1) and 170b)  (see paragraphs 14-17) |

Operative part

| 1. | The appeal is not allowed to proceed. |

| 2. | G-Core Innovations Sàrl shall pay its own costs. |

[Top](#document1)