21 May 2021 (*1)

(Appeal – EU trade mark – Article 170a(1) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – No request that the appeal be allowed to proceed – Appeal inadmissible)

In Case C‑201/21 P,

APPEAL under Article 56 of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union, brought on 30 March 2021,

Foundation for the Protection of the Traditional Cheese of Cyprus named Halloumi,

established in Nicosia (Cyprus), represented by S. Malynicz QC and S. Baran, Barrister and by V. Marsland, Solicitor,

appellant,

the other parties to the proceedings being:

European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO),

defendant at first instance,

established in Sofia (Bulgaria),

intervener at first instance,

makes the following

1By its appeal, Foundation for the Protection of the Traditional Cheese of Cyprus named Halloumi seeks to have set aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 20 January 2021, Foundation for the Protection of the Traditional Cheese of Cyprus named Halloumi v EUIPO – M. J. Dairies (BBQLOUMI) (T‑328/17 RENV, not published, EU:T:2021:16, ‘the judgment under appeal’), by which that Court dismissed its action for annulment of the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 16 March 2017 (Case R 497/2016-4), relating to opposition proceedings between the Foundation for the Protection of the Traditional Cheese of Cyprus named Halloumi and M. J. Dairies.

2The present appeal comes within the scope of Article 58a of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union.

3It is clear from Article 170a(1) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice that in the situations referred to in Article 58a of that statute, the appellant must annex to its appeal a request that the appeal be allowed to proceed, setting out the issue raised by the appeal that is significant with respect to the unity, consistency or development of EU law and containing all the information necessary to enable the Court of Justice to rule on that request. If there is no such request, the Vice-President of the Court must declare the appeal inadmissible.

4In the present case, the judgment under appeal was served on the appellant on 20 January 2021 and the appeal against that judgment reached the Registry of the Court of Justice on 30 March 2021, that is to say, the day on which the period for lodging the appeal expired.

5In support of its appeal, the appellant requested, as briefly set out in the first page of its application, that its appeal be allowed to proceed. However, no request that the appeal be allowed to proceed containing all the necessary information within the meaning of Article 170a(1) of the Rules of Procedure was annexed to the appeal.

6In those circumstances, the appeal must be dismissed as inadmissible pursuant to the last sentence of Article 170a(1) of the Rules of Procedure.

Costs

7Under Article 137 of the Rules of Procedure, which applies to appeal proceedings by virtue of Article 184(1) thereof, a decision as to costs is to be given in the order which closes the proceedings.

8Since the present order was adopted before the appeal was served on the other parties to the proceedings and, therefore, before they could have incurred costs, it is appropriate to decide that the appellant is to bear its own costs.

On those grounds, the Vice-President of the Court hereby orders:

Luxembourg, 21 May 2021

Registrar

*

Language of the case: English.