In 2007 the Appellant’s appeal was dismissed. Aggrieved and
while pondering as to the best next cause of action, whether to make an
application for a review or revision, he discovered that the time limitation of
60 days to apply for either review or revision had expired. He opted to lodge an
application for an extension of time to apply for revision, however, the
application was struck out in 2008. Still being dissatisfied, he lodged another
application for extension of time to file a review, which was preliminarily
objected. The Appellant being aggrieved, filed this third application. In this
application the Court suo motu considered the competence of the
application for extension of time. The body of the Notice of Motion referred to
the application for extension of time to apply for review and revision using
the two terms interchangeably. The confusion in the use of the words review and
revision extended to other pleadings filed by the Appellant in Court.