ORDER OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE SIXTH CHAMBER
OF THE GENERAL COURT

18 January 2012 (1)

(Removal from the register)

In Case T-298/11,

Ghost Brand Ltd, established in London (United Kingdom), represented initially by N. Caddick, QC, and E. Duncan, Solicitor, and subsequently by N. Caddick, QC,

applicant,

v

Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM), represented by A. Folliard-Monguiral, acting as Agent,

defendant,

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

Procter & Gamble International Operations SA, established in Geneva (Switzerland), represented by T. Scourfield and T. Reid, Solicitors, and S. Malynicz, Barrister,

ACTION brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 17 March 2011 (Case R 2130/2010-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Procter & Gamble International Operations SA and Ghost Brand Ltd,

1        By letter lodged at the Registry of the General Court on 14 December 2011, the applicant informed the Court in accordance with Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure that, further to an agreement reached with the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal, it wished to discontinue the proceedings. The applicant also informed the Court that it has been agreed with the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal that there should be no order as to the costs.

2        By letter lodged at the Registry of the General Court on 22 December 2012, the intervener informed the Court that, further to an agreement reached with the applicant, it consents to the discontinuance of the proceedings. The intervener also informed the Court that it has been agreed with the applicant that there should be no order as to costs and that the intervener is prepared to bear its own costs.

3        By letter lodged at the Registry of the General Court on 2 January 2012, the defendant informed the Court that it had no observations to make concerning the discontinuance of the proceedings and requested that the applicant be ordered to bear the costs.

4        The first subparagraph of Article 87(5) of the Rules of Procedure provides that a party who discontinues is to be ordered to pay the costs if they have been applied for in the observations of the other party on the discontinuance. Further, according to the second subparagraph of Article 87(5) of the Rules of Procedure, where the parties have come to an agreement on costs, the order for costs shall be in accordance with that agreement.

5        The case should therefore be removed from the register, the applicant ordered to bear its own costs and those of the defendant, and the intervener be ordered to bear its own costs.

On those grounds,

THE PRESIDENT OF THE SIXTH CHAMBER
OF THE GENERAL COURT

hereby orders:

1.      Case T-298/11 is removed from the register of the General Court.

2.      The applicant shall bear its own costs and those of the defendant.

3.      The intervener shall bear its own costs.

Luxembourg, 18 January 2012.

E. Coulon

        H. Kanninen

Registrar

       President