Catalogue des documents juridiques (cjeu_case)

104 315 documents
34321

Order of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 11 June 2020.#Perfect Bar LLC v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#Action for annulment – EU trade mark – Application for EU word mark PERFECT BAR – Absolute grounds for refusal – No distinctive character – Descriptive character – Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 – Decision taken following the annulment by the General Court of an earlier decision – Article 72(6) of Regulation 2017/1001 – Action manifestly lacking any foundation in law.#Case T-553/19.

cjeu_case ·
34322

Order of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 11 June 2020.#Perfect Bar LLC v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#Action for annulment – EU trade mark – Application for EU word mark PERFECT BAR – Absolute grounds for refusal – No distinctive character – Descriptive character – Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 – Decision taken following the annulment by the General Court of an earlier decision – Article 72(6) of Regulation 2017/1001 – Action manifestly lacking any foundation in law.#Case T-553/19.

cjeu_case ·
34323

Order of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) of 11 June 2020.#VDV eTicket Service GmbH & Co. KG v European Commission and Innovation and Networks Executive Agency.#Arbitration clause – ‘Horizon 2020 – the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation’ (2014-2020) – Project ‘European Travellers Club: Account-Based Travelling across the European Union – ETC’ – Grant agreement – Decision of INEA declaring ineligible certain costs incurred in the context of subcontracts – Misidentification of the defendant – Measure which is part of a purely contractual context from which it is inseparable – Legitimate expectations – Action in part inadmissible and in part manifestly lacking any foundation in law.#Case T-516/19.

cjeu_case ·
34324

Ordonnance du Tribunal (cinquième chambre) du 11 juin 2020.#VDV eTicket Service GmbH & Co. KG contre Commission européenne et Agence exécutive pour l’innovation et les réseaux.#Clause compromissoire – Programme-cadre pour la recherche et l’innovation « Horizon 2020 » (2014-2020) – Projet « European Travellers Club : Account-Based Travelling across the European Union – ETC » – Convention de subvention – Décision de l’INEA déclarant inéligibles certains coûts engagés dans le cadre de contrats de sous-traitance – Identification erronée de la partie défenderesse – Acte s’inscrivant dans un cadre purement contractuel dont il est indissociable – Confiance légitime – Recours en partie irrecevable et en partie manifestement dépourvu de tout fondement en droit.#Affaire T-516/19.

cjeu_case ·
34325

Order of the General Court (First Chamber) of 11 June 2020.#Patrick Vanhoudt and Others v European Investment Bank.#Action for annulment and for damages – Civil service – EIB staff – Reform of the EIB remuneration and salary progression system – Remuneration simulation tool – Act not open to challenge – Purely confirmatory act – No new and substantial facts – Non-material harm – No causal link – Action in part inadmissible and in part manifestly lacking any foundation in law.#Case T-294/19.

cjeu_case ·
34326

Order of the General Court (First Chamber) of 11 June 2020.#Patrick Vanhoudt and Others v European Investment Bank.#Action for annulment and for damages – Civil service – EIB staff – Reform of the EIB remuneration and salary progression system – Remuneration simulation tool – Act not open to challenge – Purely confirmatory act – No new and substantial facts – Non-material harm – No causal link – Action in part inadmissible and in part manifestly lacking any foundation in law.#Case T-294/19.

cjeu_case ·
34328

Case T-563/19: Order of the General Court of 11 June 2020 — Perfect Bar v EUIPO (PERFECT Bar) (Action for annulment — EU trade mark — Application for EU figurative mark PERFECT Bar — Absolute grounds for refusal — No distinctive character — Descriptive character– Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — Decision taken following the annulment by the General Court of an earlier decision — Article 72(6) of Regulation 2017/1001 — Action manifestly lacking any foundation in law)

cjeu_case ·
34329

Case T-561/19: Order of the General Court of 11 June 2020 — Lípidos Santiga v Commission (Action for annulment — Energy — Directive (EU) 2018/2001 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources — Limit on biofuels and biomass fuels produced from food and feed crops — Delegated Regulation (EU) 2019/807 — Definition of raw materials presenting a high indirect land-use change (ILUC) risk — Palm oil — Standing to bring proceedings — Lack of individual concern — Inadmissibility)

cjeu_case ·
34330

Case T-553/19: Order of the General Court of 11 June 2020 — Perfect Bar v EUIPO (PERFECT BAR) (Action for annulment — EU trade mark — Application for EU word mark PERFECT BAR — Absolute grounds for refusal — No distinctive character — Descriptive character — Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — Decision taken following the annulment by the General Court of an earlier decision — Article 72(6) of Regulation 2017/1001 — Action manifestly lacking any foundation in law)

cjeu_case ·
34331

Case T-516/19: Order of the General Court of 11 June 2020 — VDV eTicket Service v Commission and INEA (Arbitration clause — ‘Horizon 2020 — the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation’ (2014-2020) — Project ‘European Travellers Club: Account-Based Travelling across the European Union — ETC’ — Grant agreement — Decision of INEA declaring ineligible certain costs incurred in the context of subcontracts — Misidentification of the defendant — Measure which is part of a purely contractual context from which it is inseparable — Legitimate expectations — Action in part inadmissible and in part manifestly lacking any foundation in law)

cjeu_case ·
34332

Case T-294/19: Order of the General Court of 11 June 2020 — Vanhoudt and Others v EIB (Action for annulment and for damages — Civil service — EIB staff — Reform of the EIB remuneration and salary progression system — Remuneration simulation tool — Act not open to challenge — Purely confirmatory act — No new and substantial facts — Non-material harm — No causal link — Action in part inadmissible and in part manifestly lacking any foundation in law)

cjeu_case ·
34335

Arrêt de la Cour (neuvième chambre) du 11 juin 2020.#Vert Marine SAS contre Premier ministre et Ministre de l'Économie et des Finances.#Renvoi préjudiciel – Procédure de passation de contrats de concession – Directive 2014/23/UE – Article 38, paragraphe 9 – Régime des mesures correctrices destinées à prouver le rétablissement de la fiabilité d’un opérateur économique concerné par un motif d’exclusion – Réglementation nationale interdisant aux opérateurs économiques faisant l’objet d’un motif d’exclusion obligatoire de participer à une procédure de passation de contrats de concession pendant cinq ans – Exclusion de toute possibilité, pour de tels opérateurs, d’apporter la preuve des mesures correctrices prises.#Affaire C-472/19.

cjeu_case ·
34336

Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 11 June 2020.#Vert Marine SAS v Premier ministre and Ministre de l'Économie et des Finances.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d'État (France).#Reference for a preliminary ruling — Concession contract award procedure — Directive 2014/23/EU — Article 38(9) — System of compliance measures to demonstrate the reliability of an economic operator affected by a ground for exclusion — National legislation prohibiting economic operators which are the subject of a ground for compulsory exclusion from participating, for a period of 5 years, in a concession contract award procedure — Impossible for such operators to demonstrate that compliance measures have been taken.#Case C-472/19.

cjeu_case ·
34337

Arrêt de la Cour (neuvième chambre) du 11 juin 2020.#WT contre Subdelegación del Gobierno en Guadalajara.#Renvoi préjudiciel – Statut des ressortissants de pays tiers résidents de longue durée – Directive 2003/109/CE – Article 12 – Adoption d’une décision d’éloignement à l’encontre d’un résident de longue durée – Éléments à prendre en considération – Jurisprudence nationale Absence de prise en considération de ces éléments – Compatibilité Directive 2001/40/CE Reconnaissance mutuelle des décisions d’éloignement des ressortissants de pays tiers Pertinence.#Affaire C-448/19.

cjeu_case ·
34338

Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 11 June 2020.#WT v Subdelegación del Gobierno en Guadalajara.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Castilla-La Mancha.#Reference for a preliminary ruling — Status of third-country nationals who are long-term residents — Directive 2003/109/EC — Article 12 — Adoption of a decision to expel a long-term resident — Elements to be taken into consideration — National case-law — Failure to take those elements into consideration — Compatibility — Directive 2001/40/EC — Mutual recognition of decisions on the expulsion of third-country nationals — Relevance.#Case C-448/19.

cjeu_case ·
34339

Arrêt de la Cour (cinquième chambre) du 11 juin 2020.#Procédure engagée par Prezident Slovenskej republiky.#Renvoi préjudiciel – Marché intérieur de l’électricité – Directive 2009/72/CE – Article 35, paragraphes 4 et 5 – Indépendance des autorités de régulation – Législation nationale transférant le pouvoir de désignation du président de l’autorité de régulation nationale du chef de l’État au gouvernement – Participation de ministères nationaux aux procédures de fixation des prix.#Affaire C-378/19.

cjeu_case ·
34340

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 11 June 2020.#Proceedings brought by Prezident Slovenskej republiky.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Ústavný súd Slovenskej republiky.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Internal market for electricity – Directive 2009/72/EC – Article 35(4) and (5) – Independence of the regulatory authorities – National legislation transferring the power to appoint the chairperson of the national regulatory authority from the Head of State to the government – Participation of national ministries in the tariff regulation procedures.#Case C-378/19.

cjeu_case ·