ZR v European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) (C-364/23 P)

Judgment of 12 Jun 2025

law://eu/cjeu/2023/c-364-23/para_32@2026-11-13

32Furthermore, it follows from the second subparagraph of Article 256(1) TFEU and the first paragraph of Article 58 of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union that the General Court has exclusive jurisdiction, first, to establish the facts, except where the substantive inaccuracy of its findings is apparent from the documents submitted to it, and, second, to assess those facts. By contrast, when the General Court has found or assessed the facts, the Court of Justice has jurisdiction to review the legal characterisation of those facts by the General Court and the legal conclusions it has drawn from them (judgment of 4 April 2017, Ombudsman v Staelen, C‑337/15 P, EU:C:2017:256, paragraph 53 and the case-law cited).

ZR v European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) (C-364/23 P)

Key facts

History · 1 version

Connections