Court of appeal
The Court of Appeal is a higher court that reviews decisions made by lower courts. It primarily focuses on reviewing the application of the law and ensuring that legal procedures have been followed correctly. The Court of Appeal does not typically re-evaluate evidence or hear new witnesses, but rather assesses whether the lower court made errors in applying the law.
6 Key excerpts on "Court of appeal"
eBook - ePub- Paula Loughlin, Stephen Gerlis(Authors)
- 2012(Publication Date)
- Routledge-Cavendish(Publisher)
...Every appeal court has all the powers of the lower court (r 52.10). The appeal court also has power to: affirm, set aside or vary any order or judgment made or given by the lower court; refer any claim or issue for determination by the lower court; order a new trial or hearing; make orders for the payment of interest; and make a costs order (r 52.10(2)). The appeal court may exercise its powers in relation to the whole or part of an order of the lower court (r 52.10(4)). Appeal from claim tried with a jury Where the appeal is from a trial with a jury, for example, false imprisonment or defamation, the appellate court may, instead of ordering a retrial, award damages or vary an order for damages (r 52.10(3)). Disposing of appeals by consent The appellate court can dispose of an appeal, that is, dismiss it, by consent unless the appellant is a child or patient (PD 52, paras 12.1–12.4). Similarly, the appellate court can allow an appeal on the basis that the lower court was wrong and that both parties agree that the lower court was wrong, but not where one of the parties is a child or patient (PD 52, para 13.1). Second tier appeals Part 52 introduced a major reform to the procedure for appeals by restricting the scope of second tier appeals. As a general rule the decision of the appeal court on the first appeal will be the final decision. A second tier appeal will be allowed only where: the appeal raises an important point of principle or practice; or there is some other compelling reason for the Court of appeal to hear it (s 55 of the Access to Justice Act 1999). The reason for this reform was that in the interests of certainty, reasonable expense and proportionality, it was felt that there must be special circumstances before there could be more than one level of appeal. It was also felt that judges of the quality of the Lords Justices of Appeal were a scarce and valuable resource...
eBook - ePub- Gary Slapper(Author)
- 2014(Publication Date)
- Routledge(Publisher)
...4 The Courts and the Appellate Process THE COURTS A sound knowledge of the civil and criminal court structure is essential for a proper understanding of many aspects of the English legal system. You should be aware of the jurisdiction of each court (that is, which types of cases each court is competent to deal with), how its workload compares with other courts, how it is organised and what criticisms have been made of these features. The courts in question are the county courts, magistrates’ courts, the Crown Court, the High Court, the Court of appeal, the Supreme Court and the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. The court system of 2014 is significantly different from that of 20 years earlier. It has undergone many changes to fit in more with the interests and conveniences of litigants and less with the interests of lawyers. A charter for the civil courts now states, for example, that anyone telephoning a court between 9 am and 5 pm on a weekday will get a prompt and helpful answer. It also says that within ten working days of a court receiving a letter, the sender will get a reply by letter or telephone. The Judicial and Court Statistics (published in June 2011 and revised in July 2011) give the following profile of court activity for 2010: KEY FINDINGS Appeals A total of 80 appeals were entered, and 33 disposed of by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council during the year, compared to 65 and 47 for 2009 respectively. 250 appeals were presented to the Supreme Court, of which 220 were disposed of: 130 of these were refused outright. Of the 7,250 applications for leave to appeal filed with the Court of appeal Criminal Division, 21 per cent were appeals against conviction and 76 per cent were appeals against sentence...
eBook - ePub- David Barker(Author)
- 2014(Publication Date)
- Routledge(Publisher)
...The Act abolished the former Court of Criminal Appeal (created in 1907); its jurisdiction is now exercised by the Court of appeal (Criminal Division). Composition. The judges who sit in this court are the Lord Chief Justice, the Lords Justice of Appeal and judges of the Queen’s Bench Division. A quorum of three is necessary. The court may dismiss the appeal or allow it, and may order that any conviction recorded in a lower court shall be quashed. The court may order a new trial (Administration of Justice Act 1964). An appeal as to the length of a person’s sentence may be made by the person sentenced, where the sentence is considered too harsh, or by the Attorney General, where the sentence is considered unduly lenient. In an appeal by the Attorney General, the Court of appeal may increase or decrease the sentence but in an appeal by an individual the sentence may only be decreased. In R v McIlKenny and Others (1992), the court stated that it would allow an appeal only if the condition is unsafe or unsatisfactory; or if there had been a wrong decision on a question of law; or if there had been a material irregularity. To hear these appeals two courts sit full-time, while a third sits as and when required by the number of appeals listed. In accordance with the Criminal Appeal Act 1995, the Court of appeal can commission an investigation by a Criminal Cases Review Commission (appointed under the Act) and, where appropriate, report to the courts cases of wrongful conviction or sentence. 3.2.3 The Crown Court Before 1971 the more serious indictable offences were tried by a High Court judge at assizes; and the less serious by a recorder or a bench of magistrates at quarter sessions. The Royal Commission on Assizes and Quarter Sessions recommended replacing the old circuit system and sweeping reorganization. It resulted in the Courts Act 1971, which gave effect to most of the proposals. Only the main points can be noted here...
eBook - ePub- David L.A. Barker(Author)
- 2020(Publication Date)
- Routledge(Publisher)
...This is to prevent frivolous or minor cases going to this final court. Composition. This court is composed of the Lords of Appeal in Ordinary, and other peers who have held high judicial office. The quorum is three, and each judge delivers a separate speech, the verdict being by a majority. 3.2.2 Court of appeal (Criminal Division) The Criminal Appeal Act 1968 provides that the Court of appeal shall consist of two divisions: one exercising civil jurisdiction and one criminal. The Act abolished the former Court of Criminal Appeal (created in 1907); its jurisdiction is now exercised by the Court of appeal (Criminal Division). Composition. The judges who sit in this court are the Lord Chief Justice, the Lords Justice of Appeal and judges of the Queen’s Bench Division. A quorum of three is necessary. The court may dismiss the appeal or allow it, and may order that any conviction recorded in a lower court shall be quashed. The court may order a new trial (Administration of Justice Act 1964). An appeal as to the length of a person’s sentence may be made by the person sentenced, where the sentence is considered too harsh, or by the Attorney General, where the sentence is considered unduly lenient. In an appeal by the Attorney General, the Court of appeal may increase or decrease the sentence but in an appeal by an individual the sentence may only be decreased. In R v McIlKenny and Others (1992), the court stated that it would allow an appeal only if the condition is unsafe or unsatisfactory; or if there had been a wrong decision on a question of law; or if there had been a material irregularity. To hear these appeals two courts sit full-time, while a third sits as and when required by the number of appeals listed. In accordance with the Criminal Appeal Act 1995, the Court of appeal can commission an investigation by a Criminal Cases Review Commission (appointed under the Act) and, where appropriate, report to the courts cases of wrongful conviction or sentence...
eBook - ePub- Leonard Jason-Lloyd(Author)
- 2013(Publication Date)
- Routledge(Publisher)
...4 The Judiciary Although Parliament is the supreme law-making body within our constitutional framework, it is for the courts, presided over by the judges, to apply and uphold these laws. But it is impossible for Acts of Parliament to contain the remedy or cite the illegality of every human wrong and it is therefore the function of the courts to interpret the law in cases brought before them and, where necessary, to declare the law where no statute exists or its meaning is unclear. Thus the judges themselves fulfil certain law-making functions especially with regard to matters uncovered by statute. It is this latter function, whereby the judges formulate the common law, which is judge-made law in matters not covered by Act of Parliament. Such action sometimes causes the legislature to respond by subsequently passing Acts to qualify or alter some effects of case law. Nearly all of the law of trusts and most of the law on contract and tort come, from case law and many of the principles of property and criminal law are embedded in earlier judgments that are followed by other courts either as binding or persuasive precedents. Both statutes and delegated legislation are subject to inter pretation by the courts and although the courts can declare certain delegated legislation void, they cannot do this to a statute. But since the judges interpret Acts in cases brought before them, they are able to render a statute unworkable in certain instances. One example was the original section 29 of the Criminal Justice Act 1991. This excluded consideration of previous convictions for sentencing purposes unless any previous convictions disclosed aggravating factors. This was generally a very unpopular provision with the judges and a very confusing interpretation emerged from the Court of appeal as to what constituted 'aggravating factors' in this context...
eBook - ePub- Lord Dyson(Author)
- 2019(Publication Date)
- Hart Publishing(Publisher)
...Nowadays, it is very common for judges to retire even before they reach retirement age, in order to start a new career. The result has been that many judges are now promoted more quickly than they were before the retirement age was reduced. I found almost immediately that there was a great spirit of collegiality in the Court of appeal. All the judges helped each other to get through the huge workload. On substantive appeals, they sat almost invariably in constitutions of three. As a result of the increasing pressures on the court, it is now far more common for there to be constitutions of two judges. The diet of work was immensely varied covering all aspects of the law – civil, criminal and family. Although the listing officer tried to ensure that at least one of the three judges had some specialist expertise in the subject-matter of the appeal, it was impossible and, in my view, undesirable for all three judges to be specialists in the subject-matter of the appeal. This meant that all members of the court were exposed to appeals across the full range of the law and were expected to play a full part in every appeal even if the subject-matter was one with which they were not familiar. A good example of such a case was Inland Revenue Commissioners v John Lewis Properties Plc [2002] EWCA Civ 1869. The taxpayer company had purchased properties to be occupied by other companies within the same group. Having granted leases of the properties, they assigned the rental income for the first six years to a bank in return for a lump sum payment. The question was whether the payment was income or capital. The court was presided over by Lord Justice Schiemann (who was a specialist planning lawyer). The other two judges were Lady Justice Arden (who had sat in the Chancery Division and had therefore had some experience of tax cases, but, by background, had been a company law specialist) and myself. I had had no experience whatsoever of tax cases at the Bar or on the Bench...
