[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	Court of Justice of the European Communities (including Court of First Instance Decisions)
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Court of Justice of the European Communities (including Court of First Instance Decisions) >> Clem & Jo Optique v EUIPO - C&A (C&J) (EU trade mark - Order) [2020] EUECJ T-125/19_CO (21 January 2020) URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/EUECJ/2020/T12519_CO.html Cite as: ECLI:EU:T:2020:11, [2020] EUECJ T-125/19_CO, EU:T:2020:11

[New search] [Contents list] [Help]

ORDER OF THE GENERAL COURT (Third Chamber)

21 January 2020 (*)

(EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Withdrawal of the opposition — No need to adjudicate)

In Case T‑125/19,

Clem & Jo Optique SARL, established in Cormicy (France), represented by N. Hausmann, lawyer,

applicant,

v

European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), represented by J. Crespo Carrillo and H. O’Neill, acting as Agents,

defendant,

the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court, being

C&A AG, established in Zug (Switzerland), represented by M. Aznar Alonso, lawyer,  

ACTION brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 19 December 2018 (Case R 1252/2018-4), relating to opposition proceedings between C&A and Clem & Jo Optique,

THE GENERAL COURT (Third Chamber),

composed, at the time of the deliberation, of S. Frimodt Nielsen (Rapporteur), President, I.S. Forrester and N. Półtorak, Judges,

Registrar: E. Coulon,

having regard to the application lodged at the Court Registry on 20 February 2019,

makes the following

Order

1        By joint memorandum lodged at the General Court Registry on 14 November 2019, the applicant, Clem & Jo Optique SARL, and the intervener, C&A AG, informed the Court that they had reached an amicable agreement capable of resolving the dispute. The applicant and the intervener also informed the Court that they have agreed that each of them should bear its own costs.

2        By letter lodged at the Court Registry on 19 November 2019, the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) informed the Court that it had no objection to the Court finding that the action has now become devoid of purpose. EUIPO also asked the Court not to be ordered to pay the costs.

3        By joint memorandum lodged at the Court Registry on 12 December 2019, in response to the questions put by the Court, the applicant and the intervener have provided documents confirming the implementation of an amicable agreement, that is to say, first, a restriction on some of the goods covered by the EU trade mark application which formed the subject matter of the opposition and, second, the withdrawal of the opposition.

4        Under Article 130(2) and (7) of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court, on application by a party, the Court may declare that the action has become devoid of purpose and that there is no longer any need to adjudicate on it. In the present case, since the applicant and the intervener have applied for a declaration that the action has become devoid of purpose and that there is no longer any need to adjudicate on it, the Court, finding that it has sufficient information from the documents in the case file, has decided to adjudicate on that application without taking further steps in the proceedings.

5        It suffices, in the present case, to declare that, in respect of the withdrawal of the opposition, the present action has become devoid of purpose. It follows that there is no longer any need to adjudicate (see, to that effect, order of 3 July 2003, Lichtwer Pharma v OHIM — Biofarma (Sedonium), T‑10/01, EU:T:2003:182, paragraphs 16 to 18).

6        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.

7        In the circumstances of the present case, the Court takes the view that the applicant must be ordered to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by EUIPO and that the intervener must bear its own costs.

On those grounds,

THE GENERAL COURT (Third Chamber)

hereby orders:

1.      There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.

2.      Clem & Jo Optique SARL shall bear its own costs and those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).

3.      C&A AG shall bear its own costs.

Luxembourg, 21 January 2020.

*      Language of the case: English.

© European Union
The source of this judgment is the Europa web site. The information on this site is subject to a information found here: Important legal notice. This electronic version is not authentic and is subject to amendment.

---

BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/EUECJ/2020/T12519_CO.html