000923 52. ln the instant case, the Court notes that, by his own contention, the Applicant "convinced of the flagrant partiality of the First Civil Chamber of the Daloa Court of Appeal" brought before the Supreme Court of Justice an application for divestiture on the grounds of legitimate suspicion. According to the Applicant, the Supreme Court ruled in that direction, divesting the Daloa Court of Appeal and moving the case to Abidjan Court of Appeal. 53. ln the circumstances, the Court is of the opinion that in adjudicating the allegation of violation arising from the proceedings before the Abidjan Court of Appeal, ECOWAS Court of Justice covered the settlement of the allegation of violation founded on the partiality of the Daloa Court of Appeal, the two allegations forming a set of claims. The Court therefore finds that the claims are identical and that the second condition has been met. 54. Lastly, as regards the third condition, this has also been met since the Parties agree that ECOWAS Court of Justice rendered two decisions on the merits of the same case. The decisions include, in particular, Judgment No. ECWCCJ/JUD of 24 April, 2015 on the merits of the case and Judgment No. ECWCCJ/RUL/ 08/16 of 17 May, 2016 on the Application in respect of failure to adjudicate on the aforesaid Judgment. 55. ln view of the aforesaid, it follows that the instant Application has been settled by ECOWAS Court of Justice within the meaning of Article 56 (7) of the Charter regarding the first condition set by this Article. 56. What remains to be determined is whether the settlement was "in accordance with the principles" invoked in Article 56 (7). ln this respect, this Court is of the opinion that, of the three instruments mentioned in that Article, the Charter is applicable in this case. 57. ln light of the evidence on file, this Court notes that ECOWAS Court of Justice examined the case on the basis of the following provisions of the Charter: 15 @-