Paras 42-46: the Appeals Chamber found that when a party wishes to object to the introduction of evidence of certain material facts on the basis of lack of notice of these material facts, it should do so at the time the evidence is introduced. Nonetheless,

45. […] [W]hen an objection based on lack of notice is raised at trial (albeit later than at the time the evidence was adduced), the Trial Chamber should determine whether the objection was so untimely as to consider that the burden of proof has shifted from the Prosecution to the Defence in demonstrating whether the accused’s ability to defend himself has been materially impaired. In doing so, the Trial Chamber should take into account factors such as whether the Defence has provided a reasonable explanation for its failure to raise its objection at the time the evidence was introduced and whether the Defence has shown that the objection was raised as soon as possible thereafter.