22.On 26 September 2014, Application had been the Registry notified the Respondent State that an filed against it, and invited the latter to submit a Response thereto within 60 days of receipt of the notification pursuant to Rule 37 of the Rules. 23.On 7 October 2014, the Registry forwarded a copy of the Application to the other entities mentioned in Rule 35 of the Rules. 24.0n 9 January 2015, the Registry contacted the Respondent State, drawing its attention to the expiry of the 60 days’ timeframe allowed for it to file its Response to the Application. 25.On 15 April 2015, the Applicant transmitted additional pleadings to its initial Application. On 8 May 2015, the Applicant prayed the Court to enter a judgment in default on the ground that the Respondent had, up till then, failed to file its Response to the Application. 26.At its 37th received the Ordinary Session Respondent held from State’s 18 May Response and, to 5 June 2015, the Court in the interest of justice, decided to accept the same even though it was submitted out of time. 27.On 2 June 2015, the Respondent's Response was transmitted to the Applicant who, by email dated 8 June 2015, notified the Registry of its intention not to file a Reply to the Respondent State’s Response. The Applicant prayed the Court to render its decision on the basis of the initial Application, the additional pleadings and the annexes submitted on 15 April 2015. 28.At its 38th Ordinary Session held from 31 August to 18 September 2015, the Court decided, pursuant to Rule 45(2) of the Rules® and paragraph 45 of its > The Court may ask any person or institution of its choice to obtain information, express an opinion or submit a report to it on any specific point. 8