Procurement of additional supplies or works of a similar nature where it is established that a new competitive bidding would not provide any benefit and that prices obtained during the contract extension are reasonable. If the extension is predictable from the onset, the initial contract must have some provisions to that effect”. It is pertinent to examine the provisions guiding applications for review before this Court. Applications for review of judgment are governed principally by Article 25 of the Protocol of the Court and Article 92 of the Rules of Court. Article 25 of the Protocol A/P1/7/91 reads: 1) An application for revision of a decision may be made only when it is based upon the discovery of some fact of such a nature as to be a decisive factor, which fact was, when the decision was given, unknown to the court and also to the party claiming revision, provided always that such ignorance was not due to negligence. 2) The proceedings for revision shall be opened by a decision of the Court expressly recording the existence of a new fact, recognizing that it has such a character as to lay the case open to revision and declaring the application admissible on this ground. 3) The Court may require prior compliance with the terms of the decision before it admits proceedings in revision. 5