107. In the present case, the Court notes, as it has earlier established in the present judgment, that local remedies were exhausted by the judgment of 23 July 2014 delivered by the Joint Chambers of the Respondent State’s Supreme Court. It follows that, as the present Application was lodged on 18 July 2016, a period of one (1) year, eleven (11) months and twenty-five (25) days elapsed after the exhaustion of domestic remedies. In the circumstances, the Court considers that the time in question is manifestly reasonable. 108. In view of the foregoing, the Court holds that the present Application was filed within reasonable time after exhaustion of local remedies. iii. Objection to admissibility based on the case having been previously settled 109. The Respondent State submits that a press article of 3 February 2018 reports that on behalf of the same toxic waste victims, Coordination nationale des victimes des déchets toxiques de Côte d'Ivoire (the CNVDT), a second victims’ association brought various actions before domestic courts of the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and France seeking reparations for victims. It is the Respondent State’s contention that these processes render the present Application inadmissible. * 110. In their Reply, the Applicants contend that the case has not been brought before any international tribunal or any other regional or international mechanism. *** 111. The Court notes that, in accordance with Article 56(7) of the Charter, which restates the provisions of Rule 50(2)(g) of the Rules, applications shall be considered if they “do not deal with cases which have been settled in accordance with the principles of the Charter of the United Nations (UN 28