Catalogue des documents juridiques (cjeu_case)

104 314 documents
9626

Judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 16 October 2024.#Medspa Srl v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for EU word mark ALDO COPPOLA AMO – Earlier national word marks and earlier international registration of word mark MIAMO – Earlier national figurative mark and earlier international registration of figurative mark MIAMO Healthy Skin System – Relative ground for refusal – No likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001.#Case T-508/23.

cjeu_case ·
9627

Judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 16 October 2024.#Medspa Srl v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for EU word mark ALDO COPPOLA AMO – Earlier national word marks and earlier international registration of word mark MIAMO – Earlier national figurative mark and earlier international registration of figurative mark MIAMO Healthy Skin System – Relative ground for refusal – No likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001.#Case T-508/23.

cjeu_case ·
9630

Judgment of the General Court (Tenth Chamber, Extended Composition) of 16 October 2024.#HG v European Commission.#Civil service – Officials – Compensation for damage suffered by the European Union – Recovery of a debt by offsetting – Limitation period – Applicable law – Second subparagraph of Article 98(2) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 – Concept of ‘normal circumstances’ – Prior formal decision establishing the claim which was the subject of the action.#Case T-494/23.

cjeu_case ·
9631

Judgment of the General Court (Tenth Chamber, Extended Composition) of 16 October 2024.#HG v European Commission.#Civil service – Officials – Compensation for damage suffered by the European Union – Recovery of a debt by offsetting – Limitation period – Applicable law – Second subparagraph of Article 98(2) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 – Concept of ‘normal circumstances’ – Prior formal decision establishing the claim which was the subject of the action.#Case T-494/23.

cjeu_case ·
9632

Judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 16 October 2024.#Sergio Rossi SpA v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#EU trade mark – Invalidity proceedings – EU figurative mark sr 1 – Earlier national figurative marks SR – Relative ground for invalidity – Likelihood of confusion – 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) – Obligation to state reasons – Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001.#Case T-344/23.

cjeu_case ·
9633

Judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 16 October 2024.#Sergio Rossi SpA v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#EU trade mark – Invalidity proceedings – EU figurative mark sr 1 – Earlier national figurative marks SR – Relative ground for invalidity – Likelihood of confusion – 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) – Obligation to state reasons – Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001.#Case T-344/23.

cjeu_case ·
9636

Judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 16 October 2024.#Fractal Analytics, Inc. v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#EU trade mark – Revocation proceedings – EU figurative mark FRACTALIA Remote Systems – Genuine use of the mark – Article 18(1) and (2) and Article 58(1)(a) and (2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 – Evidence submitted for the first time before the Board of Appeal – Article 27(4) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625 – Nature of use – Assessment of evidence – Comparison of the subcategories of services used and the specification of the services covered by the mark.#Case T-211/23.

cjeu_case ·
9637

Judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 16 October 2024.#Fractal Analytics, Inc. v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#EU trade mark – Revocation proceedings – EU figurative mark FRACTALIA Remote Systems – Genuine use of the mark – Article 18(1) and (2) and Article 58(1)(a) and (2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 – Evidence submitted for the first time before the Board of Appeal – Article 27(4) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625 – Nature of use – Assessment of evidence – Comparison of the subcategories of services used and the specification of the services covered by the mark.#Case T-211/23.

cjeu_case ·
9638

Judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 16 October 2024.#Communications Regulatory Authority (CRA) v Council of the European Union.#Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures taken in view of the situation in Iran – Freezing of funds – List of persons, entities and bodies subject to the freezing of funds and economic resources – Inclusion of the applicant s name on the list – Obligation to state reasons – Rights of the defence – Right to effective judicial protection – Proportionality – Misuse of powers.#Case T-201/23.

cjeu_case ·
9639

Judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 16 October 2024.#Communications Regulatory Authority (CRA) v Council of the European Union.#Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures taken in view of the situation in Iran – Freezing of funds – List of persons, entities and bodies subject to the freezing of funds and economic resources – Inclusion of the applicant’s name on the list – Obligation to state reasons – Rights of the defence – Right to effective judicial protection – Proportionality – Misuse of powers.#Case T-201/23.

cjeu_case ·
9640

Judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 16 October 2024.#Fractal Analytics, Inc. v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#EU trade mark – Revocation proceedings – EU figurative mark FRACTALIA – Genuine use of the trade mark – Article 18(1) and (2) and Article 58(1)(a) and (2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 – Evidence submitted for the first time before the Board of Appeal – Article 27(4) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625 – Nature of use – Assessment of the evidence – Comparison between the subcategories of services used and the specification of the services covered by the trade mark.#Case T-194/23.

cjeu_case ·