APPLICATION COULD AT MOST BE CONSIDERED WITH REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 91 OF THE SAID RULES OF PROCEDURE, A PROVISION WHICH THE APPLICANT DOES NOT REFER TO IN THIS CASE;
WHEREAS, THEREFORE, THE APPLICATION IN QUESTION FALLS TO BE CONSIDERED AS AN APPLICATION INTRODUCING A NEW CASE;
WHEREAS IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLES 43 AND 78 OF THE RULES OF PROCEDURE THERE ARE GROUNDS FOR RESCINDING THE ORDER JOINING CASE 76/63 TO CASES 19 AND 65/63 AND FOR ORDERING IT TO BE REMOVED FROM THE REGISTER;
WHEREAS IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 69(4 ) OF THE SAID RULES A PARTY WHO DISCONTINUES OR WITHDRAWS FROM PROCEEDINGS SHALL BE ORDERED TO PAY THE COSTS, UNLESS THE DISCONTINUANCE OR WITHDRAWAL IS JUSTIFIED BY THE CONDUCT OF THE OPPOSITE PARTY;
WHEREAS THE DEFENDANT HAS NEVER DISPUTED THE FACT THAT CASE 65/63 CONCERNS BOTH INTEGRATION AND TERMINATION OF CONTRACT;
WHEREAS, HOWEVER, THE APPLICANT CITES CERTAIN PASSAGES OF THE INTERIM ORDER MADE IN CASE 65/63R, WITH A VIEW TO PROVING HIS INTEREST IN CLARIFYING THE MEANING OF HIS PREVIOUS CONCLUSIONS;
WHEREAS, SINCE HE COULD HAVE CLARIFIED THEM IN HIS REPLY TO BE PRESENTED IN JOINED CASES 19 AND 65/63, IT WAS NOT NECESSARY TO LODGE A SEPARATE APPLICATION;
WHEREAS, THEREFORE, HE MUST BE ORDERED TO BEAR HIS OWN COSTS, AND THE DEFENDANT'S COSTS MUST BE BORNE BY IT IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLES 70 AND 96(1 ) OF THE RULES OF PROCEDURE;
Operative part
ORDERS :
1 . CASE 76/63 IS SEPARATED FROM JOINED CASES 19 AND 65/63;
2 . CASE 76/63 IS REMOVED FROM THE REGISTER;
3 . EACH PARTY SHALL BEAR ITS OWN COSTS .