25042Case T-102/22: Action brought on 22 February 2022 — Transgourmet Ibérica v EUIPO — Aldi (Gourmet)cjeu_case · 22 février 2022
25043Case C-127/22: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Varhoven administrativen sad (Bulgaria) lodged on 22 February 2022 — Balgarska telekomunikatsionna kompania EAD v Direktor na Direktsia ‘Obzhalvane i danachno-osiguritelna praktika’ Sofiacjeu_case · 22 février 2022
25044Case C-125/22: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank Den Haag, zittingsplaats’s-Hertogenbosch (Netherlands) lodged on 22 February 2022 — X, Y, and their six minor children v Staatssecretaris van Justitie en Veiligheidcjeu_case · 22 février 2022
25045Order of the Court of 22 February 2022.#Sony Interactive Entertainment Europe Ltd 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-679/21 P.cjeu_case · 22 février 2022
25046Order of the Court of 22 February 2022.#Sony Interactive Entertainment Europe Ltd 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-679/21 P.cjeu_case · 22 février 2022
25047Order of the Court (Chamber determining whether appeals should proceed) of 22 February 2022.#Residencial Palladium, SL v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#Appeal – EU trade mark – Determination as to whether appeals should be allowed to proceed – Article 170b 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-674/21 P.cjeu_case · 22 février 2022
25048Order of the Court (Chamber determining whether appeals should proceed) of 22 February 2022.#Residencial Palladium, SL v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#Appeal – EU trade mark – Determination as to whether appeals should be allowed to proceed – Article 170b 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-674/21 P.cjeu_case · 22 février 2022
25049Order of the Vice-President of the Court of 22 February 2022.#Fastweb SpA v European Commission.#Appeal – Intervention – Competition – Concentrations – Decision declaring a concentration to be compatible with the internal market and the Agreement on the European Economic Area, subject to compliance with certain commitments – Undertaking operating on the markets concerned by the concentration – Interest in the result of the case – Admission to intervene.#Case C-649/21 P(I).cjeu_case · 22 février 2022
25050Order of the Vice-President of the Court of 22 February 2022.#Fastweb SpA v European Commission.#Appeal – Intervention – Competition – Concentrations – Decision declaring a concentration to be compatible with the internal market and the Agreement on the European Economic Area, subject to compliance with certain commitments – Undertaking operating on the markets concerned by the concentration – Interest in the result of the case – Admission to intervene.#Case C-649/21 P(I).cjeu_case · 22 février 2022
25051Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 22 February 2022.#X and Y v Openbaar Ministerie.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Urgent preliminary ruling procedure – Judicial cooperation in criminal matters – European arrest warrant – Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA – Article 1(3) – Surrender procedures between Member States – Conditions for execution – Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Second paragraph of Article 47 – Fundamental right to a fair trial before an independent and impartial tribunal previously established by law – Systemic or generalised deficiencies – Two-step examination – Criteria for application – Obligation of the executing judicial authority to determine, specifically and precisely, whether there are substantial grounds for believing that the person in respect of whom a European arrest warrant has been issued, if surrendered, runs a real risk of breach of his or her fundamental right to a fair trial before an independent and impartial tribunal previously established by law.#Joined Cases C-562/21 PPU and C-563/21 PPU.cjeu_case · 22 février 2022
25052Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 22 February 2022.#X and Y v Openbaar Ministerie.#Requests for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank Amsterdam.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Urgent preliminary ruling procedure – Judicial cooperation in criminal matters – European arrest warrant – Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA – Article 1(3) – Surrender procedures between Member States – Conditions for execution – Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Second paragraph of Article 47 – Fundamental right to a fair trial before an independent and impartial tribunal previously established by law – Systemic or generalised deficiencies – Two-step examination – Criteria for application – Obligation of the executing judicial authority to determine, specifically and precisely, whether there are substantial grounds for believing that the person in respect of whom a European arrest warrant has been issued, if surrendered, runs a real risk of breach of his or her fundamental right to a fair trial before an independent and impartial tribunal previously established by law.#Joined Cases C-562/21 PPU and C-563/21 PPU.cjeu_case · 22 février 2022
25053Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 22 February 2022.#Proceedings brought by RS.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Rule of law – Independence of the judiciary – Second subparagraph of Article 19(1) TEU – Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Primacy of EU law – Lack of jurisdiction of a national court to examine the conformity with EU law of national legislation found to be constitutional by the constitutional court of the Member State concerned – Disciplinary proceedings.#Case C-430/21.cjeu_case · 22 février 2022
25054Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 22 February 2022.#Proceedings brought by RS.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Craiova.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Rule of law – Independence of the judiciary – Second subparagraph of Article 19(1) TEU – Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Primacy of EU law – Lack of jurisdiction of a national court to examine the conformity with EU law of national legislation found to be constitutional by the constitutional court of the Member State concerned – Disciplinary proceedings.#Case C-430/21.cjeu_case · 22 février 2022
25055Opinion of Advocate General Rantos delivered on 22 February 2022.#Sea Watch eV v Ministero delle Infrastrutture e dei Trasporti and Others.#Requests for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per la Sicilia.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Expedited procedure – Lack of effectiveness – Relationship with national proceedings for interim measure.#Joined Cases C-14/21 and C-15/21.cjeu_case · 22 février 2022
25056Joined Cases C-562/21 PPU and C-563/21 PPU: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 22 February 2022 (requests for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank Amsterdam — Netherlands) — Execution of European arrest warrants issued against X (C-562/21 PPU), Y (C-563/21 PPU) (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Judicial cooperation in criminal matters — European arrest warrant — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — Article 1(3) — Surrender procedures between Member States — Conditions for execution — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Second paragraph of Article 47 — Fundamental right to a fair trial before an independent and impartial tribunal previously established by law — Systemic or generalised deficiencies — Two-step examination — Criteria for application — Obligation of the executing judicial authority to determine, specifically and precisely, whether there are substantial grounds for believing that the person in respect of whom a European arrest warrant has been issued, if surrendered, runs a real risk of breach of his or her fundamental right to a fair trial before an independent and impartial tribunal previously established by law)cjeu_case · 22 février 2022
25057Case C-430/21: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 22 February 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Craiova — Romania) — proceedings brought by RS (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Rule of law — Independence of the judiciary — Second subparagraph of Article 19(1) TEU — Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Primacy of EU law — Lack of jurisdiction of a national court to examine the conformity with EU law of national legislation found to be constitutional by the constitutional court of the Member State concerned — Disciplinary proceedings)cjeu_case · 22 février 2022
25058Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 22 February 2022.#Hochmann Marketing v European Commission.#Application for revision – Article 159 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Conditions – Manifest inadmissibility.#Case C-539/20 P-REV.cjeu_case · 22 février 2022
25059Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 22 February 2022.#Hochmann Marketing v European Commission.#Application for revision – Article 159 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Conditions – Manifest inadmissibility.#Case C-539/20 P-REV.cjeu_case · 22 février 2022
25060Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 22 February 2022.#XXXX v Commissaire général aux réfugiés et aux apatrides.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Common policy on asylum – Common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection – Directive 2013/32/EU – Article 33(2)(a) – Inadmissibility of an application for international protection lodged in a Member State by a third-country national who has obtained refugee status in another Member State, where the minor child of that third-country national, who is a beneficiary of subsidiary protection status, resides in the first Member State – Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Article 7 – Right to respect for family life – Article 24 – Best interests of the child – No infringement of Articles 7 and 24 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights due to the inadmissibility of the application for international protection – Directive 2011/95/EU – Article 23(2) – Obligation on the Member States to ensure the family unity of beneficiaries of international protection is maintained.#Case C-483/20.cjeu_case · 22 février 2022