14. By letter dated Court for a second 28 September, extension 2011, the Applicant requested the of time for its reply, for a further period of one year, ‘to allow the situation in Libya to evolve sufficiently to permit the gathering of the required evidence’; 15. During its 23 Ordinary Session, the Court decided to serve the Applicant's request for extension of time on the Respondent; 16. By letter dated 22 December, 2011, the Registry served on the 2012, the Respondent, the Applicant's request for extension of time; 17. During Court its 24"" Ordinary Session noted that the held from Respondent had not 19 to 30 March, reacted to the Applicant's request, and decided to extend the time for the Applicant to file its reply to 31 August, 2012; 18. By letter dated 2 May, 2012 and received at the Registry on 15 June 2012, the Representative of the ‘drop the case’ as the Respondent 19. Respondent requested the Court to government is no longer in existent; By separate letters of 27 June, 2012, the Applicant, as well as PALU, were served with copies of the Respondent's letter of 2 May; 20. By August, letter dated 2012, 28 August, 2012, the Applicant requested until the circumstances on the ground received Registry on 30 that the matter be ‘stood down in Libya permit the gathering of the necessary evidences and testimonies’: 5 at the