00050I 45. The court recalls its jurisprudence in Norbeft Zongo and others v Burkina Faso in which it held "... that the reasonableness of the timeframe for seizure depends on the specific circumstances of the case and should be determined on a caseby-case basis."8 46. The record before this Court shows that local remedies were exhausted on 29 July 2013 when the Court of Appeal of Tanzania delivered its judgment while the Application was filed on 8 December 2015, that is, two (2) years, four (4) months and ten (10) days after local remedies were exhausted. The court has to determine whether this period can be considered reasonable in terms of Rule 40 (6) of the Rules and Article 56(6) of the Charter. 47. The Court notes that the Applicant is in prison and this resulted in restriction of his movements and his access to Information about the existence of the Court.e He chose to use the review procedure of the Court of Appeal,to by filing an application for review on 13 september 2013, even though, it is not a remedy required to be exhausted before filing an Application before this court. He had an expectation that this review would have been determined within a reasonable time. The court further notes that the application for review was pending by the time he filed the Application. The court is of the view that the Applicant should not be penalised for the time he spent awaiting the determination of his application for review of the Court of Appeal's judgment. 48. consequently, the court finds that the time taken by the Applicant to seize it, that is, two (2) years, four (4) months and ten (10) days after the exhaustion of local remedies is reasonable. 49. The objection raised in this regard is therefore dismissed e See Beneficiaies of late Norbeft Zongo, Abdoulaye Nikiema a/,as ADlasse, Ernest Zongo, Btaise ilboudo and Mouvement Burkinabe des Drorts de I'Homme et des Peuptes v Burkina Faso (merits) (2014) I AfCLR 219 S 121. see A/ex Thomas v Tanzania (merits) (201s) 1 ArcLR 46s S 74, Kenedy lvan v Tanzania (Merits and Reparations) S 56. 1o Werema Wangoko Werema and Another v Tanzania (Merits and Reparations) S49,ArmandGuehi v. Tanzania (Merits and Reparations) g 56. s 14 9 {w,*<