Code of Civil Procedures”, thus recalling that the procedures relating to personal status are the same as those provided for in the Code of Civil Procedure. 60. The Court further notes that the Ariana Court of First Instance, by Judgment No. 29907 of 4 June 2014, pronounced the Applicant’s divorce and awarded her custody of her two children, alimony and residence in the marital home. Her husband appealed the said judgment on 10 June 2014, following which the Tunis Court of Appeal, by Judgment 1 June 2015, relieved the Applicant of child custody, alimony, and the marital home. On 7 December 2016, the Cassation Court, the highest court of the Respondent State, dismissed the cassation appeal filed by the Applicant against the judgment of 1 June 2015. 61. The Court also notes that there was no further remedy for the Applicant to pursue regarding the divorce proceedings in order to challenge the decisions regarding child custody, alimony and residence in the matrimonial home. 62. Accordingly, the Court dismisses the Respondent State’s objection based on non-exhaustion of local remedies in relation to the divorce case. ii. Exhaustion of local remedies in the adultery case 63. The Respondent State maintains that, under Article 56 of the Charter, the Court must not examine the Application until it has ascertained that domestic remedies have been exhausted, unless it finds that the remedies in question have been unduly prolonged. 64. Regarding the adultery case, the Applicant submits copies of the decisions of domestic courts in relation to her conviction. 65. The Applicant further asserts that Article 236 of the Penal Code, under which she was tried and convicted, is unconstitutional insofar as it does not define the material particulars of the offence of adultery. She further 19