1 THE APPLICANT, BY APPLICATION LODGED IN THE COURT REGISTRY ON 28 AUGUST 1972, REQUESTS THE ANNULMENT OF A SERIES OF INTERNAL COMPETITIONS, TOGETHER WITH THE COMPETITION NOTICES RELATIVE THERETO, INSTITUTED BY THE COMMISSION IN 1971 WITH A VIEW TO FILLING VACANT POSTS FOR ADMINISTRATORS IN CAREER BRACKET A7/A6 .
2 THE COMMISSION, DEFENDANT IN THE MAIN ACTION, HAS RAISED AN OBJECTION OF INADMISSIBILITY BASED ON NON-OBSERVANCE OF ARTICLE 91 OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS .
3 PARAGRAPH 2 OF THIS ARTICLE, AS AMENDED BY REGULATION NO 1473/72 OF 1 JULY 1972, PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL JOURNAL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES ON 16 JULY 1972, MAKES THE ADMISSIBILITY OF AN APPLICATION TO THE COURT OF JUSTICE DEPENDENT UPON THE PRIOR SUBMISSION BY THE APPLICANT TO THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY OF A COMPLAINT WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 90 ( 2 ) AGAINST AN ACT ADVERSELY AFFECTING HIM .
4 THE QUESTION OF ADMISSIBILITY MUST BE RESOLVED ON THE BASIS OF THE RULES IN FORCE AT THE DATE ON WHICH THE APPLICATION WAS SUBMITTED .
5 THE FIRST STEP IS ACCORDINGLY TO CONSIDER WHETHER THE APPLICANT HAS SUBMITTED TO THE COMMISSION A PRIOR COMPLAINT AGAINST AN ACT ADVERSELY AFFECTING HER .
6 ON THIS POINT THE APPLICANT RELIES UPON A LETTER WHICH SHE ADDRESSED ON 18 MAY 1972 TO THE MEMBER OF THE COMMISSION RESPONSIBLE FOR ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS .
7 THIS LETTER WAS BASED, ACCORDING TO THE APPLICANT' S OWN STATEMENTS, ON CERTAIN INFORMATION WHICH HAD COME TO HER, BUT OF WHICH SHE DOES NOT GIVE THE SOURCE .
8 THE RESULT OF HER PERFORMANCE IN THE COMPETITION WAS NOT, HOWEVER, NOTIFIED TO THE APPLICANT UNTIL 15 JUNE, THAT IS SEVERAL WEEKS AFTER THE DISPATCH OF THE ABOVEMENTIONED LETTER .
9 UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, THIS LETTER CANNOT BE CONSIDERED AS A COMPLAINT AGAINST AN ACT ADVERSELY AFFECTING THE APPLICANT .
10 THE APPLICATION IS ACCORDINGLY INADMISSIBLE UNDER THE TERMS OF ARTICLE 91 ( 2 ) OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS .
11 THE APPLICANT HAS FAILED IN HER APPLICATION .
12 UNDER THE TERMS OF ARTICLE 69 ( 2 ) OF THE RULES OF PROCEDURE THE UNSUCCESSFUL PARTY SHALL BE ORDERED TO PAY THE COSTS .
13 HOWEVER, UNDER THE TERMS OF ARTICLE 70 OF THE RULES OF PROCEDURE, THE COSTS INCURRED BY THE INSTITUTIONS IN APPLICATIONS BY SERVANTS OF THE COMMUNITIES ARE BORNE BY THE INSTITUTIONS .
THE COURT ( SECOND CHAMBER )
HEREBY :
1 . DISMISSES THE ACTION AS INADMISSIBLE;
2 . ORDERS EACH PARTY TO BEAR ITS OWN COSTS .
