Documents : Union européenne

Union supranationale de 27 États membres. Les actes officiels (règlements, directives, décisions) sont publiés par l'Office des publications de l'UE (Cellar/EUR-Lex). La jurisprudence de la Cour de justice de l'UE (CJUE) relève également d'un organe de l'UE.

Site officiel ↗

Types de documents
regulation (161334) cjeu_case (104314) decision (43198) directive (8067)
316 913 documents
24282

Case T-773/22: Judgment of the General Court of 25 October 2023 — Contorno Textil v EUIPO — Harmont & Blaine (GILBERT TECKEL) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for an EU figurative mark, representing a dachshund in profile, GILBERT TECKEL — Earlier EU figurative mark representing a dachshund in profile — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — Equal treatment — Legal certainty)

cjeu_case ·
24283

Case T-511/22: Judgment of the General Court of 25 October 2023 — Olimp Laboratories v EUIPO — Schmitzer (HPU AND YOU) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU figurative mark HPU AND YOU — Earlier EU and national figurative marks representing three hexagons — Earlier EU figurative mark OLIMP — Relative ground for refusal — No likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — Family of marks — Legitimate expectations — Legal certainty)

cjeu_case ·
24284

Case T-386/22: Judgment of the General Court of 25 October 2023 — QF v Council (Common foreign and security policy — Restrictive measures adopted in respect of Russia’s actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine — Freezing of funds and economic resources — Inclusion of the applicant’s name on the lists of persons, entities and bodies concerned — Concept of ‘association’ — Error of assessment)

cjeu_case ·
24287

Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 25 October 2023.#SC Assofrutti Rom S.R.L v Agenţia pentru Finanţarea Investiţiilor Rurale and Centrul Regional pentru Finanţarea Investiţiilor Rurale 5 Vest Timişoara.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 53(2) and Article 94 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Common Agricultural Policy – Financial support for investments in tree plantations – Requirement to set out the legislative context of the dispute in the main proceedings – Requirement to state the reasons justifying the need for an answer from the Court – Lack of sufficient information – Manifest inadmissibility.#Case C-635/22.

cjeu_case ·
24288

Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 25 October 2023.#SC Assofrutti Rom S.R.L v Agenţia pentru Finanţarea Investiţiilor Rurale and Centrul Regional pentru Finanţarea Investiţiilor Rurale 5 Vest Timişoara.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Timişoara.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 53(2) and Article 94 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Common Agricultural Policy – Financial support for investments in tree plantations – Requirement to set out the legislative context of the dispute in the main proceedings – Requirement to state the reasons justifying the need for an answer from the Court – Lack of sufficient information – Manifest inadmissibility.#Case C-635/22.

cjeu_case ·
24289

Case C-635/22, Assofrutti Rom: Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 25 October 2023 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Timişoara — Romania) — SC Assofrutti Rom SRL v Agenţia pentru Finanţarea Investiţiilor Rurale, Centrul Regional pentru Finanţarea Investiţiilor Rurale 5 Vest Timişoara (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 53(2) and Article 94 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice — Common Agricultural Policy — Financial support for investments in tree plantations — Requirement to set out the legislative context of the dispute in the main proceedings — Requirement to state the reasons justifying the need for an answer from the Court — Lack of sufficient information — Manifest inadmissibility)

cjeu_case ·
24290

Judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 25 October 2023.#BNP Paribas Public Sector SA v Single Resolution Board.#Arbitration clause – Single resolution mechanism for credit institutions and certain investment firms (SRM) – Single Resolution Fund (SRF) – Contracts concerning the irrevocable payment commitment and the collateral arrangements – Rejection of the request for return of collateral linked to ex ante contributions provided in the form of irrevocable payment commitments – Institution whose authorisation has been withdrawn – Article 7(3) of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/81 – Non-contractual liability – Unjust enrichment.#Case T-688/21.

cjeu_case ·
24291

Judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 25 October 2023.#BNP Paribas Public Sector SA v Single Resolution Board.#Arbitration clause – Single resolution mechanism for credit institutions and certain investment firms (SRM) – Single Resolution Fund (SRF) – Contracts concerning the irrevocable payment commitment and the collateral arrangements – Rejection of the request for return of collateral linked to ex ante contributions provided in the form of irrevocable payment commitments – Institution whose authorisation has been withdrawn – Article 7(3) of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/81 – Non-contractual liability – Unjust enrichment.#Case T-688/21.

cjeu_case ·
24294

Case T-688/21: Judgment of the General Court of 25 October 2023 — BNP Paribas Public Sector v SRB (Arbitration clause — Single resolution mechanism for credit institutions and certain investment firms (SRM) — Single Resolution Fund (SRF) — Contracts concerning the irrevocable payment commitment and the collateral arrangements — Rejection of the request for return of collateral linked to ex ante contributions provided in the form of irrevocable payment commitments — Institution whose authorisation has been withdrawn — Article 7(3) of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/81 — Non-contractual liability — Unjust enrichment)

cjeu_case ·
24297

Judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber, Extended Composition) of 25 October 2023 (Extracts).#Bulgarian Energy Holding EAD and Others v European Commission.#Competition – Abuse of a dominant position – Internal market in natural gas – Decision finding an infringement of Article 102 TFEU – Regulated market – Definition of the relevant market – Romanian Transit Pipeline 1 – Holder of an exclusive right to use the Romanian Pipeline 1 – Refusal to grant access – Public supply obligation – State action defence – Transmission system operator – Storage system operator – Anticompetitive strategy – Exclusionary effects – Single and continuous infringement – Rights of the defence.#Case T-136/19.

cjeu_case ·
24298

Judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber, Extended Composition) of 25 October 2023 (Extracts).#Bulgarian Energy Holding EAD and Others v European Commission.#Competition – Abuse of a dominant position – Internal market in natural gas – Decision finding an infringement of Article 102 TFEU – Regulated market – Definition of the relevant market – Romanian Transit Pipeline 1 – Holder of an exclusive right to use the Romanian Pipeline 1 – Refusal to grant access – Public supply obligation – State action defence – Transmission system operator – Storage system operator – Anticompetitive strategy – Exclusionary effects – Single and continuous infringement – Rights of the defence.#Case T-136/19.

cjeu_case ·
24299

Case T-136/19: Judgment of the General Court of 25 October 2023 — Bulgarian Energy Holding and Others v Commission (Competition — Abuse of a dominant position — Internal market in natural gas — Decision finding an infringement of Article 102 TFEU — Regulated market — Definition of the relevant market — Romanian Transit Pipeline 1 — Holder of an exclusive right to use the Romanian Pipeline 1 — Refusal to grant access — Public supply obligation — State action defence — Transmission system operator — Storage system operator — Anticompetitive strategy — Exclusionary effects — Single and continuous infringement — Rights of the defence)

cjeu_case ·