You are on page 1of 1

C 112/32 EN Official Journal of the European Union 10.5.

2003

ORDER OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE The applicant claims that the Court should:

of 4 March 2003 — annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the
Office of 5 December 2002 in Case No R 1072/2000-2;
in Case T-316/02: Marie-Claude Girardot v Commission — order the defendant to pay all the costs.
of the European Communities ( 1)

(Officials — Action for annulment — Refusal to admit to


the tests of a competition — Irregularity of the prior Pleas in law and main arguments
administrative procedure — Manifest inadmissibility of the
action for annulment) Applicants for Com- F. Dann and A. Backer
munity trade mark:
(2003/C 112/62)
Community trade mark The word mark ‘HOOLIGAN’ —
sought: application No 7179 filed in
(Language of the case: French)
respect of goods in Class 25

Proprietor of mark or The applicant


In Case T-316/02: Marie-Claude Girardot, residing in L’Haye sign cited in the oppo-
les Roses (France), represented by E. Boigelot, lawyer, with an sition proceedings:
address for service in Luxembourg, against the Commission of
the European Communities (Agents: F. Clotuche-Duvieusart Mark or sign cited in The French word mark and the
and H. Tserepa-Lacombe) — application for annulment of the opposition: international word mark ‘OLLY
rejection of the applicant’s application to take part in the tests GAN’, registered, inter alia, for
for Internal Competition COM/R/502211/01 — the Court of goods in Class 25 (clothing)
First Instance (First Chamber), composed of: B. Vesterdorf,
President, and R.M. Moura Ramos and H. Legal, Judges; Decision of the Oppo- Refusal of the application for
H. Jung, Registrar, has made an order on 4 March 2003, the sition Division: registration
operative part of of which is as follows:
Decision of the Board of Annulment of the decision of the
Appeal: Opposition Division
1. The application is dismissed as inadmissible.
Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of
2. The parties are ordered to bear their own costs. Regulation (EC) No 40/94 and of
the legal concept of likelihood of
confusion.
( 1) OJ C 305 of 7.12.02.

Action brought on 20 February 2003 by Société Provença- Action brought on 24 February 2003 by Olimpiaki
le d’Achat et de Gestion (SPAG) against the Office for Aeroporia A.E. (Olympic Airways) against the Com-
Harmonisation in the Internal Market mission of the European Communities

(Case T-57/03) (Case T-68/03)

(2003/C 112/63) (2003/C 112/64)

(Language of the case: French) (Language of the Case: Greek)

An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
Market was brought before the Court of First Instance of the ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 20 February 2003 by Société European Communities on 24 February 2003 by Olimpiaki
Provençale d’Achat et de Gestion (SPAG), established in Aeroporia A.E. (Olympic Airways), whose seat is at 96-100
Marseilles, France, represented by K. Manhaeve, lawyer, with Leoforos Singrou, 11741 Athens, Greece, represented by Denis
an address for service in Luxembourg. F. Dann and A. Backer, Waelbroek, Efthimios Bourtzalas, Julian Ellison, Matthew Hall,
Frankfurt am Main, Germany, were also parties to the proceed- Andreas Kalogeropoulos, Kharis Tagaras and Aristidis Khiote-
ings before the Board of Appeal. lis, lawyers.