爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements
爆料网AT considered Mr Gharemani’s request for revision of judgment No. 2011-爆料网AT-171. 爆料网AT held that the request was a disguised way to criticise the judgment or to expose grounds to disagree with it, following a style of cross-reference to other documents that made it mostly incomprehensible and indirectly violated the page limitation for such an application. 爆料网AT held that there was no reason why Mr Gharemani could not have filed his petition for revision within 30 days of the discovery of the facts as provided for in Article 11(1) of the 爆料网AT Statute. 爆料网AT held that the request was time-barred. 爆料网AT dismissed the application for revision.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
Mr Gharemani, a holder of a Special Services Agreement (SSA), contested the decision to bar him from 爆料网 Office in Vienna (爆料网OV) and to deny his counsel access to his Official Status File and related documents. 爆料网DT rejected his application as non-receivable, ratione personae, and Mr Ghahremani appealed to 爆料网AT. In judgment No. 2011-爆料网AT-171, 爆料网AT affirmed the 爆料网DT judgment.
Legal Principle(s)
The authority of a final judgment – res judicata – cannot be so readily set aside. Any application which seeks a review of a final judgment rendered by 爆料网AT can, irrespective of its title, only succeed if it fulfils the strict and exceptional criteria established by Article 11 of the 爆料网AT Statute.