132. To do this, the Court must verify whether the conditions that authorize the parties to use this exceptional revision procedure are met, or more precisely, whether the conditions for its admissibility are met. 133. And as this Court concluded, “The conditions of an application for revision such as provided for in Article 25 of the Protocol A/P/P1/7/91 are related to the discovery by the Applicant of a new fact, of nature as exerting a decisive influence on the decision, the ignorance of this fact not being due to the negligence of the Applicant.” (See case MRS TOKUNBO LIJADU OYEMADE V. COUNCIL OF MINISTERS & 4 ORS, in the decision rendered on November 17th, 2009, for Application Revision in Judgment No. ECW/CCJ/JUD/02/08, Reported in LR2009- §29) 134. These conditions or assumptions of admissibility are to be verified cumulatively, and the lack of one of them, by itself, determines the inadmissibility of the application. 135. This is the understanding of this Court in the Judgment mentioned above while stating that: "The Revision of a court decision is an exceptional procedure and subject to strict interpretation. The Court ensures that the conditions of admissibility provided for Revision are fulfilled before everything else. The default of one of the conditions renders the application inadmissible independently of the appreciation of the other conditions.” (see §31) 136. This Court listed the conditions for the admissibility of an application for Revision in the case MUSA SAIDYKHAN V. THE REPUBLIC OF THE GAMBIA, RULING No. ECW/CCJ/APP/RUL/03/12, REPORTED IN 2012 CCJELR, in this way: “The first condition to be met to succeed with a review application is that the application must have been filed within five years of 25