III.7- In his “substantive statement” the Republic of Benin argued that the
applicant refers to its conclusions dated 26 September 2013 and filed late in
violation of the procedural rules of this Court and without justifying reasons for
this delay, that in his conclusions that he has raised the inadmissibility of these
new findings of the applicant, that the inadmissibility was already
demonstrated in the most simple details, that otherwise he sought the rejection
of the whole pleas developed in the conclusions of 26 September 2013, that in
relation to the opening of the expedited procedure he took and addressed to
the Court two (02) different observations, that the observations concerns the
undated application and that concerning counter reply, that the applicant
challenged the Court for not having ruled on his conclusions of 17 December
2012 in which he first raised the inadmissibility of the conclusions of the
Republic of Benin dated 20, 21 and 22 November 2012 and secondly a
reconciliation of date, that he showed to the applicant that no legal
consequences can be drawn from the conclusions dated 17 December 2012
which he relies on unnecessarily, that it could be liable to undermine the
authority of res judicata attached to the judgment of 6 March 2014;
III.8- The defendant requested this Court to:
- Declare all new claims or exhibits relied on or filed in this case by the
applicant as inadmissible;
- Award him the benefit of the terms of his conclusions mentioned below:
1. Reply conclusions dated 28 October 2013 filed at the Court on 4
November 2013;
2. Comments on the undated application for expedited procedure of 24 July
2012;
3. Observations on the reply against undated motion for expedited
procedure on 22 November 2012;
4. Reply comments on the last conclusions of inadmissibility by the
Republic of Benin and merging of hearing date of 30 January 2013 filed
at the Court on 11 February 2013;
- Confirm the authority of res judicata attached to judgment of 6 March
2014 delivered by this Court;
- Declare that the original application was submitted outside the time
prescribed by Article 64 of the Rules of Court;
- Declare unfounded the appeal for omission to give ruling;
6