ORDER OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE NINTH CHAMBER OF THE GENERAL COURT
11 March 2015(*)
(Application for leave to intervene – Removal from the register)
In Case T-347/14,
Viktor Viktorovych Yanukovych, residing in Kyiv (Ukraine), represented by T. Beazley QC,
applicant,
v
Council of the European Union, represented by E. Finnegan and
J.-P. Hix, acting as Agents,
defendant,
supported by
European Commission, represented by S. Bartelt and D. Gauci, acting as Agents,
intervener,
Application for partial annulment of Council Decision 2014/119/CFSP of 5 March 2014 (OJ 2014 L 66, p. 26), as amended by Council Implementing Decision 2014/216/CFSP of 14 April 2014 (OJ 2014 L 111, p. 91), concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine, and Council Regulation (EU) No 208/2014 of 5 March 2014 (OJ 2014 L 66, p. 1), as amended by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 381/2014 of 14 April 2014 (OJ 2014 L 111, p. 33), concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine.
1        By application lodged at the Registry of the General Court on 16 September 2014, Ukraine sought leave to intervene in the present case in support of the form of order sought by the defendant.
2        By letter lodged at the Registry of the Court on 24 December 2014, Ukraine informed the Court that it was withdrawing its application to intervene. It did not make any application as to costs.
3        By letter lodged at the Registry of the Court on 21 January 2015, the defendant informed the Court that it had no objection to the withdrawal of Ukraine. It did not make any application as to costs.
4        By letter lodged at the Registry of the Court on 22 January 2015, the applicant informed the Court that it agrees with the withdrawal. The applicant requested, pursuant to Article 87 of the Rules of Procedure, that Ukraine be ordered to pay the applicant’s costs occasioned by Ukraine’s application to intervene.
5        Under Article 87(1) of the Rules of Procedure, an order as to costs is to be made in the judgment or order bringing the proceedings to an end. Since this order brings the proceedings to an end as regards the applicant for leave to intervene, it is proper to make an order as to costs in connection with its application for leave to intervene (order of 28 November 2005, Microsoft v Commission, T-201/04, EU:T:2005:427, paragraph 50).
6        Under the first and third subparagraphs of Article 87(5) of the Rules of Procedure, a party who discontinues or withdraws from proceedings is to be ordered to pay the costs, if they have been applied for in the other party’s observations on the discontinuance. If costs are not applied for, the parties are to bear their own costs.
7        Consequently, it must be held that Ukraine is to bear its own costs and the costs of the applicant relating to Ukraine’s application to intervene. The defendant is to bear its own costs.
8        There is no need to adjudicate on the costs incurred by the intervener as it has not been invited to lodge observations on Ukraine’s application to intervene and therefore has not incurred costs relating to that application.
On those grounds,
THE PRESIDENT OF THE NINTH CHAMBER OF THE GENERAL COURT
hereby orders:
1.      Ukraine is to be removed from the register in Case T‑347/14 as an applicant to intervene.
2.      Ukraine is to bear its own costs and the costs of the applicant relating to its application to intervene.
3.      The defendant is to bear its own costs.
Luxembourg, 11 March 2015.
E.Coulon
G. Berardis
Registrar
President
* Language of the case: English.