Supreme Court dismissed interpretation request as reasoning was clear and did not address invalidity claims.

The Supreme Court rejected the plaintiff's request to interpret its own reasoning regarding the dismissal of a cassation appeal. The plaintiff argued that procedural invalidities, such as the lack of a court-appointed lawyer and the plaintiff's personal filing of the appeal, should be noted in the decision's justification. The court held that interpretation is only permitted when a text is unclear, whereas the existing reasoning clearly explained the legal basis for dismissing the appeal.