With regard to the claims for the Tribunal, first, to order the applicant’s post to be regraded to a grade corresponding to the level of his responsibilities and, secondly, to order the EEAS to bear all the consequences, in particular the financial consequences, of that regrading, retrospectively from the time of his entry into the service, it should be noted that, in the context of an action brought under Article 91 of the Staff Regulations, the court may not, without encroaching upon the powers of the administration, make declarations or findings of principle, or issue directions to an institution (see order in Caminiti v Commission, F ...[+++]‑71/09, EU:F:2011:53, paragraph 23 and the case-law cited therein).

The claim for the applicant’s post to be regraded and for the EEAS to bear all the consequences of that regrading retrospectively

It follows that the claims for the Tribunal to order the applicant’s post to be regraded to a grade corresponding to the level of his responsibilities and to order the EEAS to bear all the consequences, in particular the financial consequences, of that regrading retrospectively from the time of his entry into the service are inadmissible.

Outstanding claims arising from default by Eurosystem counterparties in the context of Eurosystem credit operations, and/or financial assets or claims (vis-à-vis third parties) appropriated and/or acquired in the context of the realisation of collateral submitted by defaulted Eurosystem counterparties in the context of Eurosystem credit operations reclassified from asset item 5 of the HBS (part of asset item 11.6 of the HBS).

Deposit liabilities to defaulted Eurosystem counterparties which have been reclassified from liability item 2.1 of the HBS.

In this context, the least developed, landlocked and island, post-conflict and post natural disaster ACP States shall receive more favourable treatment".