ORDER OF THE CIVIL SERVICE TRIBUNAL

(Second Chamber)

10 July 2009

Case F-15/09

Valentina Hristova

v

Commission of the European Communities

(Civil service – Competitions – Compliance with a judgment – Admissibility)

Application: brought under Articles 236 EC and 152 EA, in which Ms Hristova requests the Tribunal to order proper measures to ensure compliance with the judgment of the Tribunal of 25 November 2008 in Case F-50/07 Hristova v Commission [2009] ECR-SC I‑A‑1‑0000 and II‑A‑1‑0000.

Held: The application is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible. The applicant is to pay her own costs.

Summary

Officials – Actions – Purpose – Direction to the administration – Inadmissibility

(Staff Regulations, Art. 91)

In the context of an action brought under Article 91 of the Staff Regulations, the Community court may not make declarations of principle or findings nor give directions to a Community institution without encroaching upon the powers of the executive. That principle renders inadmissible heads of claim seeking an order requiring a Community institution to adopt the measures necessary to ensure compliance with a judgment by which a decision has been annulled.

(see para. 15)

See:

T-156/89 Valverde Mordt v Court of Justice [1991] ECR II‑407, para. 150; T-583/93 P v Commission [1995] ECR-SC I‑A‑137 and II‑433, paras 17 and 18

F-4/08 Hambura v Parliament [2009] ECR-SC I‑A‑1‑0000 and II‑A‑1‑0000, para. 32