8 d- The form of the order sought by the Applicant e- Where appropriate, the nature of any evidence offered in support. The Court holds that the Applicant has complied sufficiently with the requirements of Law for seizing the Court. Accordingly, the claim is considered admissible. As earlier noted, the Defendant did not take any step in defence of this suit; in consequence of which the Applicant applied for default judgment in accordance with Article 90 of the Rules of this Court. For purposes of clarity, Article 90 of the Rules of the Court is hereby reproduced: (1) Article 90 (1) if a defendant on whom an application initiating proceedings has been duly served fails to lodge a defense to the application in the proper form within the time prescribed, the applicant may apply for judgment by default. (2) The application shall be served on the Defendant (3) The Court may decide to open the oral procedure on the application (4) Before giving judgment by default, the Court shall, after considering the circumstances of case, consider: a- Whether the initiating application initiating the proceedings is admissible b- Whether the appropriate formalities have been complied with and c- Whether the application appears well founded d- The Court may order preparatory inquiry e- A judgment by default shall be enforceable. Applying these provisions to the facts, the following deductions can be made. First, the initiating application was filed by the Applicant on the 14th of October, 2013 and entered at the Registry of the Court and certified true copy was served on the Defendant on the 24th October, 2013. The Defendant was obliged by the rules of the Court to lodge its defence and/or enter appearance within one month of the service, if it intends to defend the action.