Chapter II: Revision proceedings.

An application for judicial review seeks to set aside a judgment that has become res judicata so that a new decision can be made on the facts and the law.

Revision may be requested only by persons who were parties or represented in the judgment.

An application for review may only be made for one of the following reasons: 1. If, after the judgment, it is revealed that the decision was surprised by the fraud of the party in whose favour it was given; 2. If, since the judgment, decisive material has been recovered which had been withheld by the act of another party; 3. If he has been judged on exhibits acknowledged or judicially…

The time limit for an application for review is two months. It runs from the day on which the party became aware of the ground for review that it is invoking.

All parties to the contested judgment must be called to the review proceedings by the applicant, on pain of inadmissibility.

The application for review shall be made by summons. However, if it is directed against a judgment produced in the course of another proceeding between the same parties before the court from which the judgment emanates, the review shall be applied for in accordance with the forms laid down for the presentation of the grounds of defence.

If a party has appealed or declares that he intends to appeal for revision against a judgment produced in proceedings pending before a court other than that which gave it, the court hearing the case in which it is produced may, depending on the circumstances, disregard it or stay it until the application for revision has been decided by the court having jurisdiction.

The application for review shall be communicated to the Public Prosecutor’s Office. Where the application for review is made by summons, such communication shall be made by the applicant who shall be responsible, on pain of inadmissibility of his application, for denouncing such summons to the Public Prosecutor’s Office.

If the judge declares the appeal admissible, he shall rule on the merits of the dispute in the same judgment, unless there are grounds for further investigation.

If revision is justified only against one head of the judgment, that head alone shall be revised unless the others depend on it.