71. The Court notes that an application for review is a procedural right of the parties enshrined in Rule 78 of the Rules. In the instant case, the Court reiterates that the withdrawal of the Declaration has no effect on the Application for Review brought in relation to the initial Application of 8 November 2017. Accordingly, the Court holds that there is no abuse of process. 72. In conclusion, the Court finds no reason for it to depart from Rule 32(2) of the Rules and decides that each party shall bear its own costs. IX. OPERATIVE PART 73. For these reasons, The Court, Unanimously On jurisdiction, i. Dismisses the objection to the Court’s personal jurisdiction; ii. Declares that it has jurisdiction; Admissibility, iii. Finds that the Application has identified the judgment of which a review is sought and was filed within the required time-limits; iv. Finds that the challenges to the judgment of 2 December 2021 do not constitute new facts and that, therefore, no new evidence has been adduced. 20