TO ADMIT THEM TO THE TESTS FOR THAT COMPETITION .
2 IN A SEPARATE DOCUMENT , SUBMITTED ON THE SAME DAY UNDER ARTICLE 83 ET SEQ . OF THE RULES OF PROCEDURE , THE SAME APPLICANTS ASKED THE COURT TO ' DECIDE AND ORDER THAT THE PROCEDURE IN COMPETITION NO COM/B/2/82 BE SUSPENDED UNTIL A DECISION HAS BEEN GIVEN ON THE SUBSTANCE OF THE CASE ' .
3 THE ADMISSIBILITY OF THE APPLICATION FOR SUSPENSION IS NOT DISPUTED .
4 ACCORDING TO SETTLED CASE-LAW , AN APPLICATION TO SUSPEND THE OPERATION OF ANY MEASURE ADOPTED BY THE INSTITUTIONS WILL ONLY BE GRANTED IF THE FACTUAL AND LEGAL GROUNDS RELIED ON ESTABLISH A PRIMA FACIE CASE FOR THE MEASURES BEING SOUGHT . MOREOVER , THERE MUST BE AN URGENT NEED FOR THE MEASURES , IN THE SENSE THAT IT MUST BE NECESSARY THAT THEY BE ADOPTED AND COME INTO EFFECT BEFORE JUDGMENT IS DELIVERED ON THE SUBSTANCE OF THE CASE IN ORDER TO AVOID SERIOUS AND IRREPARABLE DAMAGE TO THE PARTY SEEKING THEIR ADOPTION . FINALLY , SUCH MEASURES MUST BE PROVISIONAL , THAT IS TO SAY , THEY MUST NOT PREJUDGE THE DECISION ON THE SUBSTANCE OF THE CASE .
5 IN ITS OBSERVATIONS SUBMITTED UNDER ARTICLE 84 ( 1 ) OF THE RULES OF PROCEDURE , THE COMMISSION STATES THAT THERE IS NO FUMUS BONI JURIS IN THIS CASE BECAUSE THE SELECTION BOARD FOR THE COMPETITION SCRUPULOUSLY RESPECTED A NOTICE OF COMPETITION DRAFTED BY THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES LAID DOWN IN THE STAFF REGULATIONS . IT ADDS THAT THERE ARE ALSO NO CIRCUMSTANCES JUSTIFYING ADOPTION OF URGENT MEASURES SINCE , ACCORDING TO SETTLED CASE-LAW , THE COURT CAN ANNUL THE DECISION OF A SELECTION BOARD NOT TO ADMIT A CANDIDATE TO THE TESTS AND AT THE SAME TIME ORDER THAT THE COMPETITION BE REOPENED AS REGARDS THAT CANDIDATE .
6 WITH REGARD TO THE EXISTENCE OF A FUMUS BONI JURIS , THE PRESIDENT CONSIDERS THAT THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE APPLICANTS IN SUPPORT OF THEIR APPLICATION DO NOT , AT FIRST SIGHT , SEEM PARTICULARLY SOLID . THE APPLICANTS RELY ESSENTIALLY ON TWO SUBMISSIONS : FIRST , THAT THE INTERVENTION OF THE CANDIDATES ' SUPERIORS , PROVIDED FOR BY THE NOTICE OF COMPETITION , WAS UNLAWFUL AND , SECONDLY , THAT NO ADEQUATE STATEMENT OF REASONS WAS GIVEN FOR THE DECISION . ALTHOUGH THE FIRST OF THOSE SUBMISSIONS , IF IT WERE ACCEPTED , WOULD LEAD TO THE NOTICE OF COMPETITION BEING DECLARED UNLAWFUL , IT CANNOT BE ADVANCED , AS THE APPLICANTS SEEK TO DO , FOR THE PURPOSE OF OBTAINING ADMISSION TO THE TESTS ON THE BASIS OF CRITERIA OTHER THAN THOSE LAID DOWN IN THE NOTICE OF COMPETITION . WITH REGARD TO THE SUBMISSION THAT NO ADEQUATE STATEMENT OF REASONS WAS GIVEN , ACCOUNT MUST BE TAKEN OF THE FACT THAT , ACCORDING TO THE CASE-LAW OF THE COURT , THE REQUIREMENT TO STATE REASONS MUST BE ASSESSED ACCORDING TO THE DIFFERENT