Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

C 112/32 EN Official Journal of the European Union 10.5.2003

**ORDER OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE**

**of 4 March 2003**

**in Case T-316/02: Marie-Claude Girardot v Commission**
**of the European Communities** ( [1] )

_**(Officials — Action for annulment — Refusal to admit to**_
_**the tests of a competition — Irregularity of the prior**_
_**administrative procedure — Manifest inadmissibility of the**_
_**action for annulment)**_

(2003/C 112/62)

_(Language of the case: French)_

In Case T-316/02: Marie-Claude Girardot, residing in L’Haye
les Roses (France), represented by E. Boigelot, lawyer, with an
address for service in Luxembourg, against the Commission of
the European Communities (Agents: F. Clotuche-Duvieusart
and H. Tserepa-Lacombe) — application for annulment of the
rejection of the applicant’s application to take part in the tests
for Internal Competition COM/R/502211/01 — the Court of
First Instance (First Chamber), composed of: B. Vesterdorf,
President, and R.M. Moura Ramos and H. Legal, Judges;
H. Jung, Registrar, has made an order on 4 March 2003, the
operative part of of which is as follows:

1. _The application is dismissed as inadmissible._

2. _The parties are ordered to bear their own costs._

( [1] ) OJ C 305 of 7.12.02.

**Action brought on 20 February 2003by Société Provença-**
**le d’Achat et de Gestion (SPAG) against the Office for**
**Harmonisation in the Internal Market**

**(Case T-57/03)**

(2003/C 112/63)

_(Language of the case: French)_

An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 20 February 2003 by Société
Provençale d’Achat et de Gestion (SPAG), established in
Marseilles, France, represented by K. Manhaeve, lawyer, with
an address for service in Luxembourg. F. Dann and A. Backer,
Frankfurt am Main, Germany, were also parties to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

—
annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the
Office of 5 December 2002 in Case No R 1072/2000-2;

—
order the defendant to pay all the costs.

_Pleas in law and main arguments_

Applicants for Com- F. Dann and A. Backer
munity trade mark:

Community trade mark The word mark ‘HOOLIGAN’ —
sought: application No 7179 filed in
respect of goods in Class 25

Proprietor of mark or The applicant
sign cited in the opposition proceedings:

Mark or sign cited in The French word mark and the
opposition: international word mark ‘OLLY
GAN’, registered, inter alia, for
goods in Class 25 (clothing)

Decision of the Oppo- Refusal of the application for
sition Division: registration

Decision of the Board of Annulment of the decision of the
Appeal: Opposition Division

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of
Regulation (EC) No 40/94 and of
the legal concept of likelihood of
confusion.

**Action brought on 24 February 2003 by Olimpiaki**
**Aeroporia A.E. (Olympic Airways) against the Com-**
**mission of the European Communities**

**(Case T-68/03)**

(2003/C 112/64)

_(Language of the Case: Greek)_

An action against the Commission of the European Communities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 24 February 2003 by Olimpiaki
Aeroporia A.E. (Olympic Airways), whose seat is at 96-100
Leoforos Singrou, 11741 Athens, Greece, represented by Denis
Waelbroek, Efthimios Bourtzalas, Julian Ellison, Matthew Hall,
Andreas Kalogeropoulos, Kharis Tagaras and Aristidis Khiotelis, lawyers.