ITS STAFF . SUCH A POSSIBILITY IS NOT INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE PROHIBITION IN ARTICLE 7(1 ) OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS .
THIS PROHIBITION DOES NOT EXCLUDE THE TAKING INTO ACCOUNT WITHIN THE CONDITIONS AND LIMITS FIXED OBJECTIVELY BY THE STAFF REGULATIONS OF THE DESIRE TO SAFEGUARD THE GEOGRAPHICAL BALANCE REQUIRED BY THE COMMUNITY SPIRIT .
IN THIS CASE IT IS ESTABLISHED THAT THE PURPOSE OF THE LANGUAGE CONDITION IN QUESTION WAS TO RESERVE THE POST IN QUESTION TO A NATIONAL OF A SPECIFIC MEMBER STATE, PRIOR TO ANY CONSIDERATION OF THE MERITS OF THE OFFICIALS ELIGIBLE FOR PROMOTION ACCORDING TO ARTICLE 45 OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS .
THUS, IF THE OFFICIALS INTERESTED IN THIS POST WERE NOT OF THE NATIONALITY REQUIRED, THEY WERE AUTOMATICALLY DEPRIVED OF ANY OPPORTUNITY OF HAVING THEIR POSSIBLE CANDIDATURE CONSIDERED .
IN THIS CASE MOREOVER IT IS NOT DISPUTED THAT THE LIMITATION IMPOSED BY THE DEFENDANT ON ITS POWERS OF SELECTION WAS NOT JUSTIFIED ON THE GROUNDS OF THE PROPER FUNCTIONING OF THE DEPARTMENT RESPONSIBLE FOR THE POST IN QUESTION .
SUCH A PROCEDURE CONTRAVENES THE REQUIREMENT THAT AVAILABLE POSTS SHOULD BE FILLED BY SELECTING OFFICIALS OF THE HIGHEST STANDARD OF ABILITIY, EFFICIENCY AND INTEGRITY .
THE LANGUAGE CONDITION IN QUESTION THEREFORE CONTRAVENES THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLES 7, 27 AND 45 OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS .
THE NOTICE OF VACANCY CONTAINING THIS CLAUSE MUST THEREFORE BE ANNULLED .
ON THE REQUEST FOR COMPENSATION
THE APPLICANT MAINTAINS THAT HE HAS SUFFERED NON-MATERIAL DAMAGE AS A RESULT OF THE APPLICATION AND BOTH MATERIAL AND NON-MATERIAL DAMAGE FROM HAVING TO REMAIN IN HIS PRESENT GRADE .
HOWEVER, HE CANNOT HAVE SUFFERED ANY DAMAGE FROM THE APPLICATION WHICH HE HAS MADE, IN WHICH HIS MAIN CLAIM IS UPHELD .
NEITHER HAS THE APPLICANT ANY RIGHT TO COMPENSATION FOR THE FACT OF HAVING TO REMAIN IN HIS PRESENT GRADE .
IN FACT, EVEN IF THE CONTESTED NOTICE OF VACANCY HAD MADE IT POSSIBLE FOR THE APPLICANT'S CANDIDATURE FOR THE POST IN QUESTION TO BE CONSIDERED, IT WOULD STILL NOT HAVE BEEN POSSIBLE TO SPECIFY A PRIORI, EVEN BEFORE THE PROCEDURE LAID DOWN IN ARTICLE 45 HAD BEEN FOLLOWED, THE OFFICIAL TO BE SELECTED .
THEREFORE, THE CONCLUSIONS OF THE APPLICANT CONCERNING THE AWARD OF DAMAGES MUST BE DISMISSED .
Decision on costs
THE APPLICANT HAS BEEN SUCCESSFUL IN HIS MAIN REQUEST FOR ANNULMENT OF THE MEASURE IN DISPUTE .
UNDER THE TERMS OF ARTICLE 69(2 ) OF THE RULES OF PROCEDURE THE DEFENDANT MUST BE ORDERED TO PAY THE COSTS .
Operative part
THE COURT
HEREBY :
1 . ANNULS THE DECISION OF THE SECRETARIAT OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT OF 1 FEBRUARY 1963 HEADED ' NOTICE OF VACANCY NO 44 AT THE DIRECTORATE - GENERAL OF THE PARLIAMENTARY DOCUMENTATION AND INFORMATION DIVISION ';
2 . DISMISSES THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR THE AWARD OF DAMAGES;
3 . ORDERS THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT TO PAY THE COSTS .