55. The Court accordingly dismisses the objection to the admissibility of the Application for failure to abide by a reasonable time limit in submitting the Application to the Court. B. Conditions not in contention between the parties 56. The court notes that the compliance with sub-rules 1,2,9,4, and 7 of Rule 40 of its Rules is not contested and that nothing on record shows that these sub-rules have not been respected. The Court therefore holds that the said conditions have been met. 57 - ln light of the foregoing, the Court holds that this Application fulfils all the admissibility requirements listed in Article 56 of the Charter and Rule 40 of its Rules and, consequently, declares the Application admissible. VII. MERITS 58. ln the Application, it is alleged that the Respondent State violated Articles 2(2), 6(a) and (b) and 21(2) of the Maputo Protocol; Articles 3 and 4 of the Children's Charter and Articles 1(3) and 5(a) of CEDAW A. 59. Alleged violation relating to the Minimum Age of Marriage The Applicants aver that Article 281 of the impugned law establishing the Family Gode sets the minimum age for contracting marriage at eighteen (1g) for boys and sixteen (16) for girls, whereas Article 6(b) of the Maputo protocol sets that age at 18 for girls. 60' The Applicants further indicate that the impugned law allows for special exemption for marriage as from fifteen (15) years, with the father's or mother,s consent for the boy, and only the father's consent, for the girl. 61. The Applicants also aver that according to the World Bank survey conducted in Mali between 2012 and 2013, sg.g% of women aged 1g and 22 were married before age of 1\ 13.60/0 4 14 at 15 years and T^ g 3.4o/o before the ag eof