2021-��AT-1127

��AT Held or ��DT Pronouncements

��AT dismissed the application for revision, because Mr. Sirhan did not present any decisive fact which could lead to a revision of the ��AT Judgment.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

2020-��AT-1023, in which ��AT dismissed Mr. Sirhan's appeal, granted the Commissioner-General's appeal and set aside the ��RWA DT Judgment.

Legal Principle(s)

An application for revision of an ��AT Judgment must be based on the discovery of a decisive fact unknown to ��AT or to the party applying for revision, provided such ignorance was not due to negligence. Such an application must be made within 30 days of the discovery of the fact and within one year of the date of the ��AT judgment.

Outcome

Revision, correction, interpretation or execution

OAJ prepared this case law summary for informational purposes only. It is no official record and should not be relied upon as an authoritative interpretation of the Tribunals' rulings. For the authoritative texts, please refer to the judgment or order rendered by the respective Tribunal. The Tribunals are the only bodies competent to interpret their respective judgments, as provided under Article 12(3) of the ��DT Statute and Article 11(3) of the ��AT Statute. Any inaccuracies in the publication are the sole responsibility of OAJ, which should be contacted directly for any correction requests. To provide comments, don't hesitate to get in touch with OAJ at oaj@un.org.

The judgment summaries were generally prepared in English. They were translated into French and are being reviewed for accuracy of the translation.

Applicants/Appellants

Mohammed Sirhan

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement