Case T‑181/14 DEP

Nürburgring GmbH

v

European Union Intellectual Property Office

(Procedure — Taxation of costs)

Summary — Order of the General Court (Sixth Chamber), 26 January 2017

1.      Judicial proceedings — Costs — Dispute over recoverable costs — Concept

(Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 170(1))

2.      Judicial proceedings — Costs — Taxation — Recoverable costs — Concept — Expenses necessarily incurred by the parties — Value added tax — Exclusion in the case of a taxable person

(Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 140(b))

3.      Judicial proceedings — Costs — Taxation — Recoverable costs — Elements to be taken into consideration — Agreement concerning fees reached between a party and his lawyer — Not included

(Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 140(b))

4.      Judicial proceedings — Costs — Taxation — Recoverable costs — Assessment having regard primarily to the total number of hours’ work objectively necessary for the purposes of the proceedings

(Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 140(b))

5.      Judicial proceedings — Costs — Taxation — Recoverable costs — Elements to be taken into consideration — Knowledge of the case by lawyers

(Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 140(b))

6.      Judicial proceedings — Costs — Taxation — Recoverable costs — Concept — Costs incurred after closure of the oral proceedings — Exclusion — Exception

(Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 140(b))

7.      Judicial proceedings — Costs — Taxation — Recoverable costs — Lawyers’ travel and subsistence expenses — Conditions for reimbursement

(Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 140(b))

1.      There is a dispute concerning the costs to be recovered within the meaning of Article 170(1) of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court, where the party ordered to pay the intervener’s costs informs the latter, before the lodging of the application for the taxation of costs, that he is not able to signify agreement to any amount of recoverable costs and make a payment without a formal decision of the Court.

Moreover, it cannot be inferred from that fact that, after the lodging of the application for the taxation of costs, the party ordered to pay those costs informed the General Court that he did not intend to submit observations on the said application that he has signified his agreement as to the amount of costs claimed or as to the calculation of the costs recoverable.

(see para. 8)

2.      According to Article 140(b) of the Rules of Procedure, the expenses necessarily incurred by the parties for the purposes of the proceedings, in particular the travel and subsistence expenses and the remuneration of agents, advisers or lawyers, are regarded as recoverable costs. It follows from that provision that recoverable costs are limited, first, to those incurred for the purpose of the proceedings before the Court and, second, to those which were necessary for that purpose.

In that regard, the amount claimed by way of VAT is regarded as recoverable costs only where the natural or legal person claiming that amount establishes that he is not subject to that tax.

(see paras 9, 12)

3.      See the text of the decision.

(see paras 10, 11)

4.      See the text of the decision.

(see paras 19, 20, 23)

5.      See the text of the decision.

(see para. 25)

6.      Recovery must be refused for costs pertaining to the period subsequent to the oral procedure if no procedural document was adopted after the hearing.

(see para. 28)

7.      It is for the person applying for costs to adduce evidence establishing the authenticity and the amount of the travel and subsistence expenses in respect of which he claims reimbursement. Neither the party ordered to pay the costs nor the Court can be required to assess such costs on the basis of a mere indicative figure provided by the person applying for costs.

(see para. 34)