OF PROVIDING A MORE PRECISE STATEMENT OF THE REASONS FOR THE REFUSALS TO ADMIT CANDIDATES TO THE COMPETITION AND THE FACT THAT MR VERZYCK DID NOT EXPRESSLY REQUEST DISCLOSURE OF THE CRITERIA OF ASSESSMENT ADOPTED BY THE SELECTION BOARD , CANNOT BE ACCEPTED .
18 IT FOLLOWS FROM THE FOREGOING CONSIDERATIONS THAT JUDGMENT SHOULD BE GIVEN IN FAVOUR OF THE APPLICANT AND THAT IT IS UNNECESSARY TO CONSIDER THE OTHER SUBMISSIONS MADE BY HIM .
THE CLAIM THAT THE COURT SHOULD ORDER THE COMMISSION TO ADOPT THE MEASURES NECESSARY FOR THE ENFORCEMENT OF THIS JUDGMENT
19 THE COURT CANNOT , WITHOUT ENCROACHING UPON THE PREROGATIVES OF THE ADMINISTRATION , ORDER A COMMUNITY INSTITUTION TO ADOPT THE MEASURES NECESSARY FOR THE ENFORCEMENT OF A JUDGMENT BY WHICH A DECISION REFUSING TO ADMIT A CANDIDATE TO A COMPETITION IS ANNULLED .
20 CONSEQUENTLY THAT CLAIM IS INADMISSIBLE .
Decision on costs
COSTS
21 UNDER ARTICLE 69 ( 2 ) OF THE RULES OF PROCEDURE THE UNSUCCESSFUL PARTY MUST BE ORDERED TO PAY THE COSTS . SINCE THE COMMISSION HAS BEEN SUBSTANTIALLY UNSUCCESSFUL IN ITS SUBMISSIONS IT MUST BE ORDERED TO PAY THE COSTS .
Operative part
ON THOSE GROUNDS ,
THE COURT ( THIRD CHAMBER )
HEREBY :
1 . ANNULS THE DECISION DATED 28 MAY 1982 BY WHICH THE COMMISSION INFORMED MR VERZYCK THAT THE SELECTION BOARD IN OPEN COMPETITION NO COM/A/325 REFUSED TO ADMIT HIM TO THE TESTS IN THE SAID COMPETITION ;
2.DISMISSES THE REMAINDER OF THE APPLICATION :
3.ORDERS THE COMMISSION TO PAY THE COSTS .