Official Journal of the European Union

C series

—

C/2025/2054

14.4.2025

(Case C-1/25 P)

(C/2025/2054)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: ZR (represented by: S. Rodrigues, avocat, A. Champetier, avocate)

Other party to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office

Form of order sought

The Appellant claims that the Court should:

—set aside the contested judgment, declare the Appellant’s requests in Case T-634/22 admissible and well-founded, and consequently

—annul the contested decisions in first instance;

—or, if this is not possible,

—refer the case before the General Court for judgement, and, in any case,

—order the Defendant to bear the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of his appeal, the Appellant raises the following pleas in law:

The rejection of the first plea is vitiated by errors of reasoning leading to errors in law.

The rejection of the second plea is vitiated by an error in law, a breach of the principle of equal treatment, misconception of the Appellant’s arguments, a breach of the duty to state reasons and contradictions in reasoning.

The review of the third plea is vitiated by a breach of the duty to state reasons, by a contradictory reasoning, by an error in law and by a breach of the principles of breach of the principle of restitutio in integrum, equal treatment and of proportionality.

The lack of review of the fourth plea is vitiated by a breach of the right to judge, the right of defence and the principle of effective remedy.

The dismissal of the claim of compensation is vitiated by a breach of the right to defence and by errors in law.

—

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/2054/oj

ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)

—