Catalogue des documents juridiques (cjeu_case)

104 314 documents
20690

Judgment of the General Court (Ninth Chamber) of 30 November 2022.#Mendes SA v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#EU trade mark – Invalidity proceedings – EU word mark VSL3TOTAL – Earlier EU word mark VSL#3 – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Similarity of the signs – Similarity of the goods – Article 8(1)(b) and Article 53(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) and Article 60(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001).#Case T-678/21.

cjeu_case ·
20691

Judgment of the General Court (Ninth Chamber) of 30 November 2022.#Mendes SA v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#EU trade mark – Invalidity proceedings – EU word mark VSL3TOTAL – Earlier EU word mark VSL#3 – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Similarity of the signs – Similarity of the goods – Article 8(1)(b) and Article 53(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) and Article 60(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001).#Case T-678/21.

cjeu_case ·
20692

Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 30 November 2022.#ADS L. Kowalik, B. Włodarczyk s.c. v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#Community design – Invalidity proceedings – Registered Community design representing an accessory for a wireless remote control – Ground for invalidity – Features of appearance of a product which are solely dictated by its technical function – Article 8(1) and Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 – Facts or evidence submitted for the first time before the Board of Appeal – Article 63(2) of Regulation No 6/2002 – Obligation to state reasons – Article 41(1) and (2)(c) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights.#Case T-612/21.

cjeu_case ·
20693

Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 30 November 2022.#ADS L. Kowalik, B. Włodarczyk s.c. v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#Community design – Invalidity proceedings – Registered Community design representing an accessory for a wireless remote control – Ground for invalidity – Features of appearance of a product which are solely dictated by its technical function – Article 8(1) and Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 – Facts or evidence submitted for the first time before the Board of Appeal – Article 63(2) of Regulation No 6/2002 – Obligation to state reasons – Article 41(1) and (2)(c) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights.#Case T-612/21.

cjeu_case ·
20694

Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 30 November 2022.#ADS L. Kowalik, B. Włodarczyk s.c. v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#Community design – Invalidity proceedings – Registered Community design representing an accessory for wireless remote controls – Ground for invalidity – Features of the appearance of a product solely dictated by its technical function – Article 8(1) and Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 – Facts or evidence submitted for the first time before the Board of Appeal – Article 63(2) of Regulation No 6/2002 – Obligation to state reasons – Article 41(1) and (2)(c) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights.#Case T-611/21.

cjeu_case ·
20695

Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 30 November 2022.#ADS L. Kowalik, B. Włodarczyk s.c. v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#Community design – Invalidity proceedings – Registered Community design representing an accessory for wireless remote controls – Ground for invalidity – Features of appearance of a product dictated solely by its technical function – Article 8(1) and Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 – Facts or evidence submitted for the first time before the Board of Appeal – Article 63(2) of Regulation No 6/2002 – Obligation to state reasons – Article 41(1) and (2)(c) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights.#Case T-611/21.

cjeu_case ·
20696

Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber, Extended Composition) of 30 November 2022.#KN v European Parliament.#Law governing the institutions – Member of the EESC – Discharge procedure in respect of the implementation of the budget of the EESC for the financial year 2019 – Parliament resolution designating the applicant as the perpetrator of psychological harassment – Action for annulment – Act not open to challenge – Inadmissibility – Action for damages – Protection of personal data – Presumption of innocence – Obligation of confidentiality – Principle of good administration – Proportionality – Sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law intended to confer rights on individuals.#Case T-401/21.

cjeu_case ·
20697

Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber, Extended Composition) of 30 November 2022.#KN v European Parliament.#Law governing the institutions – Member of the EESC – Discharge procedure in respect of the implementation of the budget of the EESC for the financial year 2019 – Parliament resolution designating the applicant as the perpetrator of psychological harassment – Action for annulment – Act not open to challenge – Inadmissibility – Action for damages – Protection of personal data – Presumption of innocence – Obligation of confidentiality – Principle of good administration – Proportionality – Sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law intended to confer rights on individuals.#Case T-401/21.

cjeu_case ·