Catalogue des documents juridiques (cjeu_case)

104 314 documents
19341

Case T-217/22: Judgment of the General Court of 1 March 2023 — Lifestyle Equities v EUIPO — Greenwich Polo Club (GREENWICH POLO CLUB GPC 2002) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — EU figurative mark GREENWICH POLO CLUB GPC 2002 — Earlier EU figurative mark BEVERLY HILLS POLO CLUB — Relative ground for invalidity — No likelihood of confusion — No similarity of the goods — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

cjeu_case ·
19347

Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 1 March 2023.#Gruppo Mauro Saviola Srl v Ministero della Transizione Ecologica (già Ministero dell’Ambiente e della Tutela del Territorio e del Mare) and Comitato nazionale per la gestione della Direttiva 2003/87/CE e per il supporto nella gestione delle attività di progetto del protocollo di Kyoto.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 53(2) and Article 94 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Requirements to set out the factual context of the dispute in the main proceedings and the reasons justifying the need for an answer from the Court to the questions referred for a preliminary ruling – Lack of sufficient information – Manifest inadmissibility.#Case C-94/22.

cjeu_case ·
19348

Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 1 March 2023.#Gruppo Mauro Saviola Srl v Ministero della Transizione Ecologica (già Ministero dell’Ambiente e della Tutela del Territorio e del Mare) and Comitato nazionale per la gestione della Direttiva 2003/87/CE e per il supporto nella gestione delle attività di progetto del protocollo di Kyoto.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 53(2) and Article 94 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Requirements to set out the factual context of the dispute in the main proceedings and the reasons justifying the need for an answer from the Court to the questions referred for a preliminary ruling – Lack of sufficient information – Manifest inadmissibility.#Case C-94/22.

cjeu_case ·
19349

Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 1 March 2023.#Edison Next SpA, v Ministero della Transizione Ecologica and Others.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 53(2) and Article 94 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Requirements to set out the factual context of the dispute in the main proceedings and the reasons justifying the need for an answer from the Court to the questions referred for a preliminary ruling – Lack of sufficient information – Manifest inadmissibility.#Case C-93/22.

cjeu_case ·
19350

Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 1 March 2023.#Edison Next SpA, v Ministero della Transizione Ecologica and Others.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 53(2) and Article 94 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Requirements to set out the factual context of the dispute in the main proceedings and the reasons justifying the need for an answer from the Court to the questions referred for a preliminary ruling – Lack of sufficient information – Manifest inadmissibility.#Case C-93/22.

cjeu_case ·
19351

Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 1 March 2023.#Edison Next SpA v Ministero della Transizione Ecologica and Others.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 53(2) and Article 94 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Requirements to set out the factual context of the dispute in the main proceedings and the reasons justifying the need for an answer from the Court to the questions referred for a preliminary ruling – Lack of sufficient information – Manifest inadmissibility.#Case C-92/22.

cjeu_case ·
19352

Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 1 March 2023.#Edison Next SpA v Ministero della Transizione Ecologica and Others.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 53(2) and Article 94 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Requirements to set out the factual context of the dispute in the main proceedings and the reasons justifying the need for an answer from the Court to the questions referred for a preliminary ruling – Lack of sufficient information – Manifest inadmissibility.#Case C-92/22.

cjeu_case ·
19353

Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 1 March 2023.#Edison Next SpA v Ministero della Transizione Ecologica and Others.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 53(2) and Article 94 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Requirements to set out the factual context of the dispute in the main proceedings and the reasons justifying the need for an answer from the Court to the questions referred for a preliminary ruling – Lack of sufficient information – Manifest inadmissibility.#Case C-91/22.

cjeu_case ·
19354

Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 1 March 2023.#Edison Next SpA v Ministero della Transizione Ecologica and Others.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 53(2) and Article 94 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Requirements to set out the factual context of the dispute in the main proceedings and the reasons justifying the need for an answer from the Court to the questions referred for a preliminary ruling – Lack of sufficient information – Manifest inadmissibility.#Case C-91/22.

cjeu_case ·
19355

Case C-94/22, Gruppo Mauro Saviola: Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 1 March 2023 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio — Italy) — Gruppo Mauro Saviola Srl v Ministero della Transizione Ecologica (formerly Ministero dell’Ambiente e della Tutela del Territorio e del Mare), Comitato nazionale per la gestione della Direttiva 2003/87/CE e per il supporto nella gestione delle attività di progetto del protocollo di Kyoto (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 53(2) and Article 94 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice — Requirements to set out the factual context of the dispute in the main proceedings and the reasons justifying the need for an answer from the Court to the questions referred for a preliminary ruling — Lack of sufficient information — Manifest inadmissibility)

cjeu_case ·
19356

Case C-93/22, Edison Next: Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 1 March 2023 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio — Italy) — Edison Next SpA, formerly Fenice — Qualità per l’ambiente SpA v Ministero della Transizione Ecologica (formerly Ministero dell’Ambiente e della Tutela del Territorio e del Mare), Ministero dello Sviluppo Economico, Comitato nazionale per la gestione della Direttiva 2003/87/CE e per il supporto nella gestione delle attività di progetto del protocollo di Kyoto (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 53(2) and Article 94 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice — Requirements to set out the factual context of the dispute in the main proceedings and the reasons justifying the need for an answer from the Court to the questions referred for a preliminary ruling — Lack of sufficient information — Manifest inadmissibility)

cjeu_case ·
19357

Case C-92/22, Edison Next: Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 1 March 2023 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio — Italy) — Edison Next SpA, formerly Fenice — Qualità per l’ambiente SpA v Ministero della Transizione Ecologica (formerly Ministero dell’Ambiente e della Tutela del Territorio e del Mare), Ministero dello Sviluppo Economico, Comitato nazionale per la gestione della Direttiva 2003/87/CE e per il supporto nella gestione delle attività di progetto del protocollo di Kyoto (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 53(2) and Article 94 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice — Requirements to set out the factual context of the dispute in the main proceedings and the reasons justifying the need for an answer from the Court to the questions referred for a preliminary ruling — Lack of sufficient information — Manifest inadmissibility)

cjeu_case ·
19358

Case C-91/22, Edison Next: Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 1 March 2023 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio — Italy) — Edison Next SpA, formerly Fenice — Qualità per l’ambiente SpA v Ministero della Transizione Ecologica (formerly Ministero dell’Ambiente e della Tutela del Territorio e del Mare), Ministero dello Sviluppo Economico, Comitato nazionale per la gestione della Direttiva 2003/87/CE e per il supporto nella gestione delle attività di progetto del protocollo di Kyoto (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 53(2) and Article 94 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice — Requirements to set out the factual context of the dispute in the main proceedings and the reasons justifying the need for an answer from the Court to the questions referred for a preliminary ruling — Lack of sufficient information — Manifest inadmissibility)

cjeu_case ·
19359

Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 1 March 2023.#Worldwide Brands, Inc. Zweigniederlassung Deutschland v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#EU trade mark – Revocation proceedings – EU word mark CAMEL – Evidence submitted for the first time before the Board of Appeal – Article 95(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 – Article 27(4) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625 – Genuine use of the mark – Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation 2017/1001 – No assessment of some of the evidence submitted.#Case T-552/21.

cjeu_case ·
19360

Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 1 March 2023.#Worldwide Brands, Inc. Zweigniederlassung Deutschland v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#EU trade mark – Revocation proceedings – EU word mark CAMEL – Evidence submitted for the first time before the Board of Appeal – Article 95(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 – Article 27(4) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625 – Genuine use of the mark – Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation 2017/1001 – No assessment of some of the evidence submitted.#Case T-552/21.

cjeu_case ·