19. The Respondent raised objections on the admissibility of the application based on the fact that it is not in compliance with Rules 28(3) and 33(2) of the Court. 20. Rule 28(3) provides as follows: “The lawyer acting for a party must lodge at the Registry a certificate that he is authorized to practice before a court of a member State or of another State, which is a party to the Treaty.” 21. Rule 33(2) provides as follows: “For the purpose of the proceedings, the application shall state an address for service in the place where the Court has its seat and the name of the person who is authorised and has expressed willingness to accept service.” C) Reliefs sought. 22. Based on the above grounds, the Respondent seeks the following reliefs from: a. To declare the application inadmissible; b. To order the Applicant to pay the sum of one hundred million (100,000,000) CFA Franc as reparation for the prejudice suffered owing to the vexatious and frustrating procedure, pursuant to Article 66.5 of the Rules of Court. APPLICANT’S REPLY TO DEFENCE OF THE RESPONDENT 9