BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
 |
[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) >> Nowhere v EUIPO - Junguo Ye (APE TEES) (EU trade mark - Order) [2019] EUECJ T-12/19_CO (18 December 2019) URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/EUECJ/2019/T1219_CO.html Cite as: ECLI:EU:T:2019:907, EU:T:2019:907, [2019] EUECJ T-12/19_CO |
||
[New search] [Contents list] [Help]
ORDER OF THE GENERAL COURT (Third Chamber)
18 December 2019 (*)
(EU trade mark — Revocation of the contested decision — Action which has become devoid of purpose — No need to adjudicate)
In Case T‑12/19,
Nowhere Co. Ltd, established in Tokyo (Japan), represented by A. Norris, Barrister,
applicant,
v
European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), represented by P. Sipos and H. O’Neill, acting as Agents,
defendant,
the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO being
Junguo Ye, residing in Elche (Spain),
ACTION brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 8 October 2018 (Case R 2474/2017-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Nowhere and Mr Ye,
THE GENERAL COURT (Third Chamber),
composed of A.M. Collins, President, V. Kreuschitz (Rapporteur) and G. Steinfatt, Judges,
Registrar: E. Coulon,
makes the following
Order
1 By document lodged at the Court Registry on 7 January 2019, the applicant, Nowhere Co. Ltd, brought the present action, seeking annulment of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 8 October 2018 (Case R 2474/2017-2), relating to opposition proceedings between the applicant and Mr Junguo Ye (‘the contested decision’).
2 By document lodged at the Court Registry on 8 April 2019, EUIPO informed the Court that the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO intended to revoke the contested decision.
3 As the parties, who were questioned in this respect by the Court, gave their agreement, on 10 May 2019, the President of the Third Chamber of the General Court decided to stay the proceedings, in accordance with Article 69(d) of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court, until a decision on revocation of the contested decision was taken by the Second Board of Appeal.
4 When questioned in this respect by the General Court, the parties informed the Court, by documents filed at the Court Registry on 29 October 2019, that, by decision of 17 July 2019 (Case R 2474/2017-2 (REV)), the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO had revoked the contested decision, in accordance with Article 103 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 June 2017 on the European Union trade mark (OJ 2017 L 154, p. 1) and Article 70 of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625 of 5 March 2018 supplementing Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the European Union trade mark, and repealing Delegated Regulation (EU) 2017/1430 (OJ 2018 L 104, p. 1). They indicated that they considered the present action had become devoid of purpose and that, therefore, there was no longer any need to adjudicate on it.
5 Under Article 131(1) of the Rules of Procedure, the Court may at any time, of its own motion, on a proposal from the Judge-Rapporteur and after hearing the parties, declare that the action has become devoid of purpose and that there is no longer any need to adjudicate on it.
6 The Court, considering that it has sufficient information from the documents in the file, holds, without taking further steps in the proceedings, that there is no need to adjudicate on the action. It is sufficient to state in the present case that, in the light of the revocation of the contested decision, the present action has become devoid of purpose and that there is no longer any need to adjudicate on it (see order of 10 July 2017, No Limits v EUIPO — Morellato (NO LIMITS), T‑43/17, not published, EU:T:2017:513, paragraph 3 and the case-law cited).
7 Under Article 137 of the Rules of Procedure, where a case does not proceed to judgment the costs are to be in the discretion of the Court. Taking into account the circumstances of the present case, EUIPO must be ordered to pay the costs. Under Article 190(2) of the Rules of Procedure, costs necessarily incurred by the parties for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal are to be regarded as recoverable costs.
On those grounds,
THE GENERAL COURT (Third Chamber)
hereby orders:
1. There is no need to adjudicate on the action.
2. The European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) shall pay the costs.
Luxembourg, 18 December 2019.
E. Coulon | A.M. Collins |
Registrar | President |
* 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/2019/T1219_CO.html
