Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

[Parties](#I1)
  
[Grounds](#MO)
  
[Operative part](#DI)

## Parties

In Case C-132/07,

REFERENCE for a preliminary ruling under Article 234 EC from the rechtbank van koophandel te Brussel (Belgium), made by decision of 26 February 2007, received at the Court on 5 March 2007, in the proceedings

Beecham Group plc and Others

v

Andacon NV,

THE PRESIDENT OF THE SECOND CHAMBER OF THE COURT,

after hearing Advocate General Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer,

makes the following

Order

## Grounds

1. By decision of 26 February 2007, received at the Court on 5 March 2007, the rechtbank van koophandel te Brussel (Commercial Court, Brussels) referred to the Court for a preliminary ruling under Article 234 EC questions on the interpretation of Articles 4(2), 6 and 9(2) and (3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1383/2003 of 22 July 2003 concerning customs action against goods suspected of infringing certain intellectual property rights and the measures to be taken against goods found to have infringed such rights (OJ 2003 L 196, p. 7) and of Article 9(1) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1891/2004 of 21 October 2004 laying down provisions for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 1383/2003 concerning customs action against goods suspected of infringing certain intellectual property rights and the measures to be taken against goods found to have infringed such rights (OJ 2004 L 328, p. 16).

2. However, on 16 May 2007, the claimants in the main proceedings appealed against that decision before the hof van beroep te Brussel (Court of Appeal, Brussels) (Belgium). Consequently, the national proceedings continued before that court.

3. By letters of 6 March and 17 March 2008, received at the Court on 10 March and 25 March respectively, the parties to the main proceedings notified the Court that they had resolved the matter amicably and that, accordingly, the questions referred for a preliminary ruling had become devoid of purpose.

4. Subsequently, the hof van beroep notified the Court of the judgment that it had delivered on 9 June 2008 in the main proceedings, recording that the dispute had been settled amicably and ordering that the proceedings be removed from that court’s register.

5. In those circumstances, by letter of 20 November 2008, the Court informed the rechtbank van koophandel that, subject to any objections received from it by 15 December 2008, the Court intended to remove the case pending before it from the Register.

6. The rechtbank van koophandel did not reply to that letter.

7. In those circumstances, the present case must be removed from the Register of the Court.

8. Since these proceedings are, for the parties to the main proceedings, a step in the action pending before the national court, the decision on costs is a matter for that court. Costs incurred in submitting observations to the Court, other than the costs of those parties, are not recoverable.

## Operative part

On those grounds, the President of the Second Chamber of the Court hereby orders:

Case C-132/07 is removed from the Register of the Court.

Luxembourg, 12 March 2009.

[Top](#document1)