PART 2: How to Bring a Case to the Court respond to the applicant’s allegations and submit its observations on the admissibility and merits of the case pursuant to Rule 54 § 2 (c). It is also possible that at this stage one or more of the complaints will be declared inadmissible and the remainder of the application is communicated. In certain circumstances, prior to or instead of the case being communicated, the Chamber, its President, or the judge rapporteur may ask both or one of the parties to submit any factual information, documents and other material which they consider to be relevant.100 Such a course of action will usually occur in cases in which the Court needs to refer to documents, information or clarifications which the applicant him or herself is unable to obtain without the respondent Government’s assistance. Upon receipt of the documentation and/or information, the case will either be communicated or declared inadmissible. In communicating the case, the Court will usually ask the respondent Government a set of questions. The nature of the questions will depend on the applicant’s allegations and the circumstances of the case; for instance in an application concerning ill-treatment in police custody, questions along the following lines may be expected: – “Did the applicant comply with the admissibility requirements set out in Article 35 of the Convention?” – “Was the applicant subjected to treatment in police custody in breach of Article 3 of the Convention?” – “Did the authorities carry out an effective official investigation into the applicant’s complaints of ill-treatment in compliance with the requirements of Articles 3 and 13 of the Convention?”101 Since it has become practice that the Court examines the admissibility and merits jointly, the respondent Government is asked to submit its observations on admissibility, merits, its position regarding a friendly settlement of the case and any proposals it might wish to make in that connection. The respondent Government will be asked to respond within twelve weeks of the notification (in urgent cases, a shorter time limit may be fixed). It is not uncommon for Governments – nor, indeed, for applicants – to request an extension of the deadline. The first such request is usually granted. 100 Rule 54 § 2 (a) of the Rules of Court. 101 For other questions in communicated cases see e.g. Chirica v. Moldova (communicated case), no. 36348/08, 23 October 2013; Shestopalov v. Russia (communicated case), no. 46248/07, 15 October 2013; Kotkov v. Russia (communicated case), no. 73094/10, 10 September 2013. 53