00llgB 30. The Court notes that claims in respect of the material prejudice resulting from the violation of a right of the Applicant must be supported by sufficient evidence and backed by explanations that establish the link between the alleged loss and the noted violation. 31.|n the instant case, the Court notes that the Applicant attached to his Application several documents including copies of the balance sheet of COMON SA and SOCOTRAC SARL, market research documents and the Articles of Association of other companies in which he holds shares. 32. The Court further notes that the Applicant also attached to his Application a letter dated 31 March 2017 by which Atradius-Assurance-Cr6dit, that provided credit insurance for orders on behalf of COMON SA, notified the Applicant of the reduction of its coverage to Four hundred thousand (400,000) Euros instead of Two million five hundred thousand (2,500,000) Euros, explaining that it was because of the international drug trafficking case in which he was implicated. 33. Following what they called an "alert confirming that all events relating to news in Benin, talk of the 2016 drug case", other credit insurers, in this case, La coface, Groupama and Euler Hermes also cancelled their credit insurance and demanded the immediate payment of outstanding amounts. For its part, Heidemark GmbH reduced its credit insurance from one million three hundred thousand (1,300,000) Euros to Four hundred thousand (400,000) Euros, while Vlm Busschaeft limited its coverage to Twenty thousand (20,000) Euros. 34.The Court notes that the devaluation of the Applicant's shares in COMON SA and SOCOTRAC SARL is linked to the loss of trust on the part of his partners because of the drug trafficking case as well as the suspension of the SOCOTRAC SARL container terminal and the withdrawal of its license as a customs broker. ll t'/-V/4)--;? @ \_---=