ORDER OF THE GENERAL COURT (Second Chamber)

5 January 2015(1)

(Community trade mark – Opposition – Withdrawal of the opposition – No need to adjudicate)

In Case T-492/14,

La Perla sp. z o.o., established in Warsaw (Poland), represented by M. Siciarek, lawyer,

applicant,

v

Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM), represented by I. Harrington, acting as Agent,

defendant,

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

Alva Management GmbH, established in Icking (Germany), represented by B. Hanika, lawyer,

ACTION brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 28 April 2014 (Case R 626/2013-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Alva Management GmbH and La Perla sp. z o.o.,

THE GENERAL COURT (Second Chamber),

composed of M. E. Martins  Ribeiro, President, S. Gervasoni (Rapporteur) and L. Madise, Judges,

Registrar: E. Coulon,

makes the following

Order

1        By letter lodged at the Registry of the Court on 25 November 2014, the applicant informed the Court of an agreement between itself and the intervener and that, pursuant to that agreement, the intervener withdrew its opposition to the application for registration of the contested mark. Consequently, the present action has become devoid of purpose.

2        By letter lodged at the Registry of the Court on 1 December 2014, the defendant informed the Court that it raised no objection to the case being declared devoid of purpose. It further requested the Court not to order it to pay the costs.

3        By letter lodged at the Registry of the Court on 3 December 2014, the intervener confirmed the existence of an amicable settlement between itself and the applicant and that therefore it withdrew the opposition.

4        Pursuant to Article 113 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court, it suffices in the present case to find that, in the light of the withdrawal of the opposition, 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, Lichtwer Pharma v OHIM – Biofarma (Sedonium), T‑10/01, ECR, EU:T:2003:182, paragraphs 16 to 18).

5        Article 87(6) of the Rules of Procedure provides that, where a case does not proceed to judgment, the costs are in the discretion of the Court.

6        In the present case, the Court considers that the applicant and the intervener must be ordered to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the defendant.

On those grounds,

THE GENERAL COURT (Second Chamber)

hereby orders:

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

2.

3.      The applicant and the intervener shall bear their own costs and shall each pay half of those incurred by the defendant.

Luxembourg, 5 January 2015.

E. Coulon

        M. E. Martins Ribeiro

Registrar

       President