The office of public prosecution accused a defendant of robbery. The office requested the court to penalise the defendant according to the relevant laws.

The court ruled that the defendant should be imprisoned for three years and that he should pay a fine of 300 Dinars.

The defendant appealed the ruling before the court of appeal. The court upheld the appealed ruling.

The defendant appealed the ruling before the court of cassation. He said in his grounds of appeal that the ruling had erred in the application of law and had insufficient evidence of causation. He said that the elements of the crime had not existed in his case and that the court had failed to establish the ruling based on valid evidence.

The court said that this argument was invalid. The court said that the court had the authority to evaluate the evidence of the case and to established the ruling accordingly. The court said that the case documents revealed that the court had been satisfied with the evidence including the testimonies of the witnesses.

The court upheld the appealed ruling.