Judicial principles and studies
Criminal Judgments and Evidentiary Assessment on Cassation: General Assembly Decision 2690/2023
A summary of a criminal decision addressing cassation review of evidentiary assessment and requiring findings to rest on evidence in the record and be rationally and legally reasoned.
Updated: 12 September 2026
Prepared and reviewed by: Ashraf Al-Khawaja
Smart reading summary
Understand and share the study quickly
A summary of a criminal decision addressing cassation review of evidentiary assessment and requiring findings to rest on evidence in the record and be rationally and legally reasoned.
Key points
- Decision subject
- Summarised principle
- Reading a criminal cassation ground
Useful for: Useful for initial reading and identifying questions that may need legal review.
This automatic summary is based on the published text. It is not legal advice and does not replace checking official sources and reviewing the facts with a qualified lawyer.
AI generation is optional and subject to Gemini usage limits. Do not send client data or attachments from this card.
Decision subject
General Assembly Decision No. 2690/2023 of the Jordanian Court of Cassation sitting in its Criminal capacity addresses the limits of cassation review of evidentiary assessment in a criminal case concerning proof of an inaccurately declared value in a customs-smuggling offence. This summary does not reproduce the judgment or its full reasons.
Summarised principle
Assessing and weighing evidence is primarily a matter for the trial court, but the conclusion must rest on evidence introduced in the case, be rationally and acceptably drawn, and comply with adequate reasoning and the law. The trial court’s role in weighing evidence does not make its judgment immune from review where it relies on non-existent evidence, an illogical inference, or reasoning that fails to address a material defence.
Reading a criminal cassation ground
A general assertion that the court wrongly assessed evidence is not enough. The ground should identify the defect in weighing evidence, drawing the conclusion, or applying the law, and explain its effect on the judgment. This decision concerns a specific case and is not by itself a complete statement of every admissibility requirement or every offence.
Practical significance
When preparing a criminal cassation challenge, connect each ground to the relevant page, evidence, material defence, and legal provision, distinguishing disagreement with facts from a defect in reasoning or a legal error. This is general information, not advice on a criminal file; the full decision and urgent review by a Jordanian lawyer are necessary where a filing deadline may apply.
Sources and references
Verify the official text and latest amendments before relying on this material professionally.
Study collection
Courts, judicial principles, and enforcement
Browse the other studies in this subject through its dedicated topical section.
Open study collectionA related service path
Commercial and civil litigation
If this study is close to your matter, review the service scope and contact the firm to discuss the facts and documents.
Review the related service