1. If it is competent prima facie to adjudicate on the substantive case or if it is not manifestly incompetent to adjudicate on the substantive applications filed; 2. If the substantive application is prima facie admissible or if it is not manifestly inadmissible; 3. If there is urgency in regard to the circumstances of fact and law invoked in support of the application for interim measures.” (see 17). 99. It follows that the Court may order interim measures only if, in essence, the case before the Court falls within its jurisdiction, if the application can be granted, and if there is an urgency to be ruled on. 100. On the other hand, as is clear from Article 82 of the Rules, given the provisional nature of the measure sought, it would expire or cease to take effect as soon as the judgment terminating the proceeding is delivered. 101. Therefore, in the instant case, considering that with the present Judgment the Court decides on the merits of the present action, putting an end to the proceedings, any pronouncement on the interim measure, therein sought, becomes unnecessary. 102. Thus the Court finds that the interim measure sought is no longer necessary. X – JURISDICTION: On the Court's alleged lack of jurisdiction: 103. The Respondent raised the lack of jurisdiction of this Court to examine the instant case, arguing that the Court has no jurisdiction to order a State to 23