Nigar Kirimova v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-727/20 R)

Judgment of 25 Sept 2024

law://eu/cjeu/2020/t-727-20/para_11@2026-11-15

11In the first place, in so far as those heads of claim should be regarded as asking the Court to order EUIPO to take certain measures, it must be recalled that, when exercising judicial review of legality under Article 263 TFEU, the Court has no jurisdiction to issue directions to the institutions, bodies, offices and agencies of the European Union, even where they concern the manner in which its judgments are to be complied with (see order of 26 October 1995, Pevasa and Inpesca v Commission, C‑199/94 P and C‑200/94 P, EU:C:1995:360, paragraph 24 and the case-law cited). Under Article 266 TFEU, where an act is annulled, the institution, body, office or entity which adopted the act must take the necessary measures to comply with the judgment.

Nigar Kirimova v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-727/20 R)

Key facts

Connections

History · 1 version