75It is not for the Court to issue directions to the institutions or to substitute itself for them (see Case T-19/90Yon Hoessle v Court of Auditors [1991] ECR II-615, paragraph 30). This is particularly the case in the context of judicial review, where the administration concerned is under a duty to take the necessary measures to comply with the judgment of the Court, and applies to both actions for annulment (Case 53/85AKZO v Commission [1986] ECR 1965 and Case T-43/92Dunlop Slazenger v Commission [1994] ECR II-441, paragraph 181) and actions for failure to act (orders made by the Court of First Instance in Case T-56/92Koelman v Commission [1993] ECR II-1267 and Case T-5/94J v Commission [1994] ECR II-391).