PART 2: How to Bring a Case to the Court the remedy advanced by the Government was in fact exhausted or was for some reason inadequate and ineffective in the particular circumstances of the case or that there existed special circumstances absolving him or her from the requirement […].130 A failure by the applicant to counter the Government’s objections to the admissibility of the application may result in the application being declared inadmissible for non-exhaustion of domestic remedies. If the respondent Government has disputed the facts, the applicant should add further information and evidence to support the facts as alleged and provide further evidence to show that his or her version of the events is more credible than that of the Government. In turn, if the respondent Government does not contest certain facts, the applicant should only include a brief statement in that regard. In addition, the applicant may adduce further material corroborating the evidence previously submitted. For example, if the Government has disputed the accuracy or the contents of medical reports detailing injuries, the applicant should consider obtaining an independent medical opinion to counter the Government’s arguments. In their observations applicants should also describe any developments that might have taken place since the introduction of the application. Just satisfaction claims as well as costs schedules should also be submitted. Just satisfaction claims and costs should be as detailed as possible and supported by sufficient documentary evidence. Pecuniary claims might for instance be supported by documented loss of earnings or income. Non-pecuniary claims could be documented through medical reports proofing suffering and distress.131 In addition, expenses, such as costs of travel (for instance to a hearing in Strasbourg), telephone, photocopying, or translation can be claimed if documented. 2.1.16 Separate Admissibility Decision Some cases are declared (partially) admissible in a separate decision. If this is the case, the Court may ask the parties to respond to specific questions, to submit observations on a particular issue, or to submit additional evidence.132 Alternatively, the Court might inform the parties that it requires no further information or observations but that the parties may nevertheless submit any additional evidence or observations that they wish. Any material thus submitted by a party will be transmitted to the other party for information or for comment, but only if the Court deems it necessary. 130 Akdivar and Others v. Turkey [GC], no. 21893/93, 16 September 1996, § 68. 131 Philip Leach, Taking a Case to the European Court of Human Rights, Oxford University Press, 2011, p. 45. 132 Khashiyev and Akayeva v. Russia, nos. 57942/00 and 57945/00, 24 February 2005, § 11. 61