32361Case C-731/19: Order of the President of the Court of 30 October 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Castilla-La Mancha — Spain) — KM v Subdelegación del Gobierno en Albacetecjeu_case · 30 октября 2020 г.
32362Ordonnance de rectification du 30 octobre 2020.#République d'Autriche contre Commission européenne.#Rectification d’arrêt.#Affaire C-594/18 P-REC.cjeu_case · 30 октября 2020 г.
32363Order of the President of the General Court of 29 October 2020.#Facebook Ireland Ltd v European Commission.#Interim proceedings – Competition – Request for information – Article 18(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 – Application for interim measures – Urgency – Prima facie case – Weighing of competing interests.#Case T-452/20 R.cjeu_case · 29 октября 2020 г.
32364Order of the President of the General Court of 29 October 2020.#Facebook Ireland Ltd v European Commission.#Interim proceedings – Competition – Request for information – Article 18(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 – Application for interim measures – Urgency – Prima facie case – Weighing of competing interests.#Case T-452/20 R.cjeu_case · 29 октября 2020 г.
32365Order of the President of the General Court of 29 October 2020.#Facebook Ireland Ltd v European Commission.#Interim proceedings – Competition – Request for information – Article 18(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 – Application for interim measures – Urgency – Prima facie case – Weighing of competing interests.#Case T-451/20 R.cjeu_case · 29 октября 2020 г.
32366Order of the President of the General Court of 29 October 2020.#Facebook Ireland Ltd v European Commission.#Interim proceedings – Competition – Request for information – Article 18(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 – Application for interim measures – Urgency – Prima facie case – Weighing of competing interests.#Case T-451/20 R.cjeu_case · 29 октября 2020 г.
32367Case T-452/20 R: Order of the President of the General Court of 29 October 2020 — Facebook Ireland v Commission (Interim proceedings — Competition — Request for information — Article 18(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 — Application for interim measures — Urgency — Prima facie case — Weighing of competing interests)cjeu_case · 29 октября 2020 г.
32368Case T-451/20 R: Order of the President of the General Court of 29 October 2020 — Facebook Ireland v Commission (Interim proceedings — Competition — Request for information — Article 18(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 — Application for interim measures — Urgency — Prima facie case — Weighing of competing interests)cjeu_case · 29 октября 2020 г.
32369Case T-163/20: Order of the General Court of 29 October 2020 — Isopix v Parliament (Action for annulment and for compensation — Public supply contracts — Tender procedure — Provision of photography services — Rejection of a tenderer’s bid and award of the contract to another tenderer — Cancellation of the procurement procedure — Action which has become, in part, devoid of purpose — No need, in part, to adjudicate — Order — Appeal in part brought before a court manifestly lacking in jurisdiction to hear it)cjeu_case · 29 октября 2020 г.
32370Order of the Court of 29 October 2020.#Peek & Cloppenburg KG, Düsseldorf v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#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.#Case C-312/20 P.cjeu_case · 29 октября 2020 г.
32371Order of the Court of 29 October 2020.#Peek & Cloppenburg KG, Düsseldorf v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#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.#Case C-312/20 P.cjeu_case · 29 октября 2020 г.
32372Order of the Court of 29 October 2020.#Peek & Cloppenburg KG, Düsseldorf v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#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.#Case C-311/20 P.cjeu_case · 29 октября 2020 г.
32373Order of the Court of 29 October 2020.#Peek & Cloppenburg KG, Düsseldorf v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#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.#Case C-311/20 P.cjeu_case · 29 октября 2020 г.
32374Order of the Court of 29 October 2020.#Peek & Cloppenburg KG, Düsseldorf v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#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.#Case C-310/20 P.cjeu_case · 29 октября 2020 г.
32375Order of the Court of 29 October 2020.#Peek & Cloppenburg KG, Düsseldorf v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#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.#Case C-310/20 P.cjeu_case · 29 октября 2020 г.
32376Order of the Court of 29 October 2020.#Peek & Cloppenburg KG, Düsseldorf v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#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 – Appeal not allowed to proceed.#Case C-309/20 P.cjeu_case · 29 октября 2020 г.
32377Order of the Court of 29 October 2020.#Peek & Cloppenburg KG, Düsseldorf v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#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 – Appeal not allowed to proceed.#Case C-309/20 P.cjeu_case · 29 октября 2020 г.
32378Order of the Court of 29 October 2020.#Peek & Cloppenburg KG, Düsseldorf v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#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.#Case C-308/20 P.cjeu_case · 29 октября 2020 г.
32379Order of the Court of 29 October 2020.#Peek & Cloppenburg KG, Düsseldorf v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#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.#Case C-308/20 P.cjeu_case · 29 октября 2020 г.
32380Order of the Court of 29 October 2020.#Peek & Cloppenburg KG, Düsseldorf v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#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.#Case C-307/20 P.cjeu_case · 29 октября 2020 г.