35401Judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) of 26 March 2020.#Raivo Teeäär v European Central Bank.#Civil service — ECB Staff — Programme of support for transition to a career outside the ECB — Rejection of an application to take part in that programme — Eligibility conditions — Different lengths of service required depending on whether a member of staff is in a single salary band or a salary broadband — Allocation to a salary band on the basis of the type of employment — Equal treatment — Proportionality — Manifest error of assessment.#Case T-547/18.cjeu_case · 26 mars 2020
35402Judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) of 26 March 2020.#Raivo Teeäär v European Central Bank.#Civil service — ECB Staff — Programme of support for transition to a career outside the ECB — Rejection of an application to take part in that programme — Eligibility conditions — Different lengths of service required depending on whether a member of staff is in a single salary band or a salary broadband — Allocation to a salary band on the basis of the type of employment — Equal treatment — Proportionality — Manifest error of assessment.#Case T-547/18.cjeu_case · 26 mars 2020
35403Case T-556/18: Order of the General Court of 26 March 2020 — Sensient Colors Europe v Commissioncjeu_case · 26 mars 2020
35404Case T-752/18: Judgment of the General Court of 26 March 2020 — Tecnodidattica v EUIPO (Shape of bases for globes and lamps) (EU trade mark — Application for a three-dimensional EU trade mark — Shape of bases for globes and lamps — Absolute ground for refusal — Sign consisting exclusively of the shape of goods which is necessary to obtain a technical result — Article 7(1)(e)(ii) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(e)(ii) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — No decorative or imaginative elements playing an important or essential role)cjeu_case · 26 mars 2020
35405Case T-654/18: Judgment of the General Court of 26 March 2020 — Armani v EUIPO — Asunción (le Sac 11) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU figurative mark le sac 11 — Earlier national word mark LESAC and earlier national figurative marks lesac — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Similarity of the signs — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — Genuine use of the earlier mark — Article 47(2) and (3) of Regulation 2017/1001)cjeu_case · 26 mars 2020
35406Case T-653/18: Judgment of the General Court of 26 March 2020 — Armani v EUIPO — Asunción (GIORGIO ARMANI le Sac 11) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU figurative mark GIORGIO ARMANI le sac 11 — Earlier national word mark LESAC and earlier national figurative marks lesac — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Similarity of the signs — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — Genuine use of the earlier mark — Article 47(2) and (3) of Regulation 2017/1001)cjeu_case · 26 mars 2020
35407Case T-646/18: Judgment of the General Court of 26 March 2020 — Bonnafous v Commission (Access to documents — Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 — Audit Report on HR Management in the EACEA — Refusal of access — Exception relating to the protection of the purpose of inspections, investigations and audits)cjeu_case · 26 mars 2020
35408Case T-547/18: Judgment of the General Court of 26 March 2020 –Teeäär v ECB (Civil service — ECB staff — Programme of support for transition to a career outside the ECB — Rejection of an application to take part in that programme — Eligibility conditions — Different lengths of service required depending on whether a staff member is in a single salary band or a salary broadband — Allocation to a salary band on the basis of the type of employment — Equal treatment — Proportionality — Manifest error of assessment)cjeu_case · 26 mars 2020
35409Arrêt de la Cour (première chambre) du 26 mars 2020.#Mikrokasa S.A. et Revenue Niestandaryzowany Sekurytyzacyjny Fundusz Inwestycyjny Zamknięty contre XO.#Renvoi préjudiciel – Protection des consommateurs – Contrats de crédit aux consommateurs – Directive 2008/48/CE – Article 3, sous g), article 10, paragraphe 2, et article 22, paragraphe 1 – Niveau d’harmonisation – Notion de “coût du crédit hors intérêts” – Directive 93/13/CEE – Article 1er, paragraphe 2 – Clauses abusives dans les contrats conclus avec les consommateurs – Plafond du coût total du crédit hors intérêts – Clauses contractuelles reflétant des dispositions législatives ou réglementaires impératives – Exclusion.#Affaire C-779/18.cjeu_case · 26 mars 2020
35410Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 26 March 2020.#Mikrokasa S.A. w Gdyni and Revenue Niestandaryzowany Sekurytyzacyjny Fundusz Inwestycyjny Zamknięty w Warszawie v XO.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Rejonowy w Siemianowicach Śląskich.#Reference for a preliminary ruling — Consumer protection — Credit agreements for consumers — Directive 2008/48/EC — Article 3(g), Article 10(2) and Article 22(1) — Level of harmonisation — Concept of ‘non-interest credit costs’ — Directive 93/13/EEC — Article 1(2) — Unfair terms in consumer contracts — Ceiling value for the total non-interest credit costs — Contractual terms reflecting mandatory statutory or regulatory provisions — Not included.#Case C-779/18.cjeu_case · 26 mars 2020
35411Arrêt de la Cour (cinquième chambre) du 26 mars 2020.#AR contre Cooper International Spirits LLC e.a.#Renvoi préjudiciel – Rapprochement des législations des États membres sur les marques – Directive 2008/95/CE – Article 5, paragraphe 1, sous b) – Article 10, paragraphe 1, premier alinéa – Article 12, paragraphe 1 – Déchéance d’une marque pour absence d’usage sérieux – Droit pour le titulaire de la marque d’invoquer une atteinte à ses droits exclusifs par l’usage par un tiers d’un signe identique ou similaire durant la période antérieure à la date d’effet de la déchéance.#Affaire C-622/18.cjeu_case · 26 mars 2020
35412Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 26 March 2020.#AR v Cooper International Spirits LLC and Others.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation.#Reference for a preliminary ruling — Approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks — Directive 2008/95/EC — Article 5(1)(b) — First subparagraph of Article 10(1) — Article 12(1) — Revocation of a trade mark for lack of genuine use — Right of the trade mark proprietor to plead infringement of his or her exclusive rights as a result of the use by a third party of an identical or similar sign during the period preceding the date on which the revocation took effect.#Case C-622/18.cjeu_case · 26 mars 2020
35413Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 26 March 2020.#Miasto Łowicz and Prokurator Generalny zastępowany przez Prokuraturę Krajową, formerly Prokuratura Okręgowa w Płocku v Skarb Państwa – Wojewoda Łódzki and Others.#References for a preliminary ruling — Second subparagraph of Article 19(1) TEU — Rule of law — Effective judicial protection in the fields covered by Union law — Principle of judicial independence — Disciplinary regime applicable to national judges — Jurisdiction of the Court — Article 267 TFUE — Admissibility — Interpretation necessary for the referring court to be able to give judgment — Meaning.#Joined Cases C-558/18 and C-563/18.cjeu_case · 26 mars 2020
35414Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 26 March 2020.#Miasto Łowicz v Skarb Państwa – Wojewoda Łódzki and Prokurator Generalny v VX and Others.#Requests for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Okręgowy w Łodzi and the Sąd Okręgowy w Warszawie.#References for a preliminary ruling – Second subparagraph of Article 19(1) TEU – Rule of law — Effective judicial protection in the fields covered by Union law – Principle of judicial independence – Disciplinary regime applicable to national judges – Jurisdiction of the Court – Article 267 TFUE – Admissibility – Interpretation necessary for the referring court to be able to give judgment – Meaning.#Joined Cases C-558/18 and C-563/18.cjeu_case · 26 mars 2020
35415Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 26 March 2020.#Erik Simpson v Council of the European Union and HG v European Commission.#Review of the judgments of the General Court of the European Union in Simpson v Council (T‑646/16 P) and HG v Commission (T‑693/16 P) — Civil service — Composition of the panel of judges which delivered the judgments at first instance — Procedure for the appointment of a judge to the European Union Civil Service Tribunal — Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Tribunal established by law — Incidental review of legality — Effect on the unity and consistency of EU law.#Joined Cases C-542/18 RX-II and C-543/18 RX-II.cjeu_case · 26 mars 2020
35416Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 26 March 2020.#Erik Simpson and HG v Council of the European Union and European Commission.#Review of the judgments of the General Court of the European Union in Simpson v Council (T‑646/16 P) and HG v Commission (T‑693/16 P) — Civil service — Composition of the panel of judges which delivered the judgments at first instance — Procedure for the appointment of a judge to the European Union Civil Service Tribunal — Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Tribunal established by law — Incidental review of legality — Effect on the unity and consistency of EU law.#Joined Cases C-542/18 RX-II and C-543/18 RX-II.cjeu_case · 26 mars 2020
35417Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 26 March 2020.#HUNGEOD Közlekedésfejlesztési, Földmérési, Út- és Vasúttervezési Kft. and Others v Közbeszerzési Hatóság Közbeszerzési Döntőbizottság.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Public procurement – Review procedures concerning the award of public supply and public works contracts – Directive 89/665/EEC – Procurement procedures of entities operating in the water, energy, transport and telecommunications sectors – Directive 92/13/EEC – Public procurement – Directives 2014/24/EU and 2014/25/EU – Review of the application of public procurement rules – National legislation which allows certain bodies to initiate a procedure of their own motion where there has been an unlawful amendment to a contract which is in the course of being performed – Time-barring of an authority’s right to initiate a procedure of its own motion – Principles of legal certainty and proportionality.#Case C-496/18.cjeu_case · 26 mars 2020
35418Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 26 March 2020.#HUNGEOD Közlekedésfejlesztési, Földmérési, Út- és Vasúttervezési Kft. and Others v Közbeszerzési Hatóság Közbeszerzési Döntőbizottság.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Törvényszék.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Public procurement – Review procedures concerning the award of public supply and public works contracts – Directive 89/665/EEC – Procurement procedures of entities operating in the water, energy, transport and telecommunications sectors – Directive 92/13/EEC – Public procurement – Directives 2014/24/EU and 2014/25/EU – Review of the application of public procurement rules – National legislation which allows certain bodies to initiate a procedure of their own motion where there has been an unlawful amendment to a contract which is in the course of being performed – Time-barring of an authority’s right to initiate a procedure of its own motion – Principles of legal certainty and proportionality.#Case C-496/18.cjeu_case · 26 mars 2020
35419Arrêt de la Cour (quatrième chambre) du 26 mars 2020.#ISS Facility Services NV contre Sonia Govaerts et Atalian NV.#Renvoi préjudiciel – Directive 2001/23/CE – Article 3, paragraphe 1 – Transferts d’entreprises – Maintien des droits des travailleurs – Marché public concernant les services de nettoyage – Attribution des lots du marché à deux nouveaux adjudicataires – Reprise d’un travailleur affecté à l’ensemble des lots du marché.#Affaire C-344/18.cjeu_case · 26 mars 2020
35420Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 26 March 2020.#ISS Facility Services NV v Sonia Govaerts and Atalian NV, formerly Euroclean NV.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Arbeidshof te Gent.#Reference for a preliminary ruling — Directive 2001/23/EC — Article 3(1) — Transfers of undertakings — Safeguarding of employees’ rights — Public contract for cleaning services — Award of market lots to two new contractors — Re‑engagement of a worker assigned to all the market lots.#Case C-344/18.cjeu_case · 26 mars 2020