Provisional text
ORDER OF THE GENERAL COURT (Second Chamber)
20 September 2017 (*)
(European Union trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Withdrawal of the opposition — No need to adjudicate)
In Case T-40/17,
Habermaaß GmbH AG, established in Bad Rodach (Germany), represented by U. Blumenröder, H. Gauß and E. Bertram lawyers,
applicant,
v
European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), represented by J. F. Crespo Carrillo and M. Tóhati, acting as Agents,
defendant,
the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court, being
Here Global BV, established in Eindhoven (Netherlands), represented by J. Erkkilä, lawyer,
ACTION brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 24 October 2016 (Case R 53/2016-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Here Global BV and Habermaaß GmbH,
THE GENERAL COURT (Second Chamber),
composed of M. Prek, President, E. Buttigieg (Rapporteur) and B. Berke, Judges,
Registrar: E. Coulon,
makes the following
Order
1 By letter lodged at the Court Registry on 26 June 2017, the intervener informed the Court of an agreement between itself and the applicant, Habermaaß GmbH, and that it withdrew its opposition to the application for registration of the contested mark. The intervener considered that due to the withdrawal of its opposition, the applicant’s application became devoid of purpose and there was no longer any need to adjudicate on the present action. It also informed the Court that, under that agreement, each party was to bear its own costs.
2 By letter lodged at the Court Registry on 10 July 2017, the defendant informed the Court that it raised no objection to the case being declared devoid of purpose. The defendant requests the Court not to order it to pay the costs.
3 By letter of 11 July 2017 the applicant confirmed that the parties have reached an agreement including the settlement of the costs.
4 Pursuant to Article 130 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court, it is sufficient in the present case to find that, in the light of the withdrawal of the opposition to the application for registration, the present action has become devoid of purpose. There is therefore no longer any need to adjudicate on the action (order of 3 July 2003 in Lichtwer Pharma v OHIM — Biofarma (Sedonium), T‑10/01, EU:T:2003:182, paragraphs 16 to 18).
5 Article 137 of the Rules of Procedure provides that, where a case does not proceed to judgment, the costs are to be in the discretion of the Court.
6 In the circumstances of the present case, the Court considers that the applicant and the intervener must be ordered to bear their own costs and each to pay half of those incurred by the defendant.
On those grounds,
THE GENERAL COURT (Second Chamber)
hereby orders:
1. There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.
2. Habermaaß GmbH and Here Global BV shall bear their own costs and shall each pay half of those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).
Luxembourg, 20 September 2017.