9Furthermore, the question of the admissibility of the application must be considered in the light of the specific nature of the contested acts, inasmuch as they were adopted following a judgment of the Court of Justice. In that connection, the Court has held that ‘it cannot be contested that those to whom a judgment of the Court annulling an act of an institution is addressed are directly concerned with the way in which the institution executes the judgment. They are therefore entitled to request the Court to rule on any failure by the institution to perform its obligations under the provisions applicable’ (judgment of 25 November 1976 in Case 30/76Küsterv Parliament [1976] ECR 1719, paragraphs 8 and 9). In the present case the cancellation of the first vacancy notice and the organization of a fresh appointment procedure by way of the adoption of the decisions in question indeed constitute the manner in which the defendant sought to execute the judgment of the Court and, accordingly, are of direct concern to the applicant.