Article 218: Fact-Question Dika Bar on Affirmed Sentences

Décisions de la Cour suprême interprétant cette section

1. Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 3399/2568 (2025)

   Where the Court of Appeal affirms the lower court and imposes imprisonment not exceeding five years, both parties are barred from a fact-question Dika under Section 218 paragraph one, and a challenge to the evidence assessment is a fact question.

   The Court of Appeal affirmed and kept imprisonment within five years. The defendant's Dika disputing the finding of forgery and use of forged documents was a challenge to the evidence assessment, which is a fact question barred under Section 218 paragraph one.

2. Arrêt n° 238/2568 de la Cour suprême (2025)

   Where the Court of Appeal affirms imprisonment of two years, a Dika disputing the evidence assessment and the sentencing discretion is a fact question barred under Section 218 paragraph one.

   The Court of Appeal affirmed imprisonment of two years each. The two defendants' Dika contesting the evidence and asking for a lighter or suspended sentence raised fact questions, barred under Section 218 paragraph one, and they had not sought a judge's certification.

3. Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 5658/2567 (2024)

   Although a Dika seeking a lighter sentence is a fact question barred under Section 218 paragraph one, once the Supreme Court accepts the defendant's separate questions of law it may also review whether the penalty imposed is appropriate.

   Employees convicted of joint theft from their employer sought a lighter sentence, which the lower court had refused to accept as a barred fact question under Section 218 paragraph one. The Supreme Court confirmed the bar but, having accepted other legal questions, went on to review the appropriateness of the penalty.

Curated decisions with case numbers verified against the Supreme Court database. English renderings are the firm's editorial translation for study.