Order — ECLI:EU:T:2004:202
Date: 2004-07-02
Language of the case: English
Court formation: President of the Chamber
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: Environment;Approximation of laws
Concepts: Application for interim measures: suspension of operation of the contested measure and other interim measures
Procedure: Action for annulment;Application for interim measures - unfounded;Application for interim measures - inadmissible;Action for damages
Origin: United Kingdom

ORDER OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE THIRD CHAMBER OF THE GENERAL COURT 18 December 2009 (1) (Removal from the register) In joined Cases T‑422/03 and T‑291/04, Enviro Tech Europe Ltd, established in Hampton Wick (United Kingdom) and Enviro Tech International, Inc., established in Chicago (United States) represented by C. Mereu and K. Van Maldegem, lawyers, applicants, v European Commission, represented by P. Oliver and G. Wilms, acting as Agents, defendant, APPLICATIONS, first, for annulment of Commission acts D(2003)430307 and D(2003)430309 of 3 November 2003 refusing the applicants’ request to alter the recommended classification of n-propyl bromide in the context of the 29th Adaptation to Technical Progress of Council Directive 67/548/EEC of 27 June 1967 on the approximation of laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the classification, packaging and labelling of dangerous substances, as well as, to compensate the damages suffered by the applicants (Case T‑422/03) and, secondly, for partial annulment of Commission Directive 2004/73/EC of 29 April 2004 adapting to technical progress for the twenty-ninth time Council Directive 67/548/EEC (OJ 2004 L 152, p.1), insofar as it concerns the classification of n-propyl bromide, as well as to compensate the damages suffered by the applicants (Case T‑291/04). 1 By letter lodged at the Registry of the General Court on 27 November 2009, the applicants in Case T-422/03 informed the Court, in accordance with Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure, that they wished to discontinue proceedings. 2 By letter lodged at the Registry on 15 December 2009, the defendant informed the Court that it had no objection to the discontinuance and requested that, in accordance with Article 87(5) of the Rules of Procedure, the applicants be ordered to pay the costs, the withdrawal not being attributable to the defendant. 3 The first subparagraph of Article 87(5) of the Rules of Procedure provides that a party who discontinues or withdraws from proceedings shall be ordered to pay the costs if they have been applied for in the observations of the other party on the discontinuance. In the present case, the defendant applied for the applicants to bear the costs. 4 Case T‑422/03 will therefore be removed from the register and the applicants shall bear their own costs as well as the costs incurred by the defendant. On those grounds, THE PRESIDENT OF THE THIRD CHAMBER OF THE GENERAL COURT hereby orders: 1. Case T‑422/03 is removed from the register of the General Court. 2. The applicants in Case T‑422/03 shall bear their own costs as well as the costs incurred by the defendant. Luxembourg, 18 December 2009. E. Coulon J. Azizi Registrar President 1 Language of the case: English.