.jpg)
Anappellate court, commonly called acourt of appeal(s),[1]appeal court,court of second instance orsecond instance court, is anycourt of law that is empowered tohear acase uponappeal from atrial court or other lowertribunal. An appellate court other than asupreme court is sometimes referred to as anintermediate appellate court.
In much of the world,court systems are divided into at least three levels: the trial court, which initially hears cases and considers factualevidence andtestimony relevant to the case; at least one intermediate appellate court; and asupreme court (or court of last resort) which primarily reviews the decisions of the intermediate courts, often on adiscretionary basis. A particular court system's supreme court is its highest appellate court.[2] Appellate courts nationwide can operate under varying rules.[3]
Under itsstandard of review, an appellate court determines the extent of the deference it will give to the lower court's decision, based on whether the appeal is one of fact or of law. In certain civil law jurisdictions, especially those following theFrench legal system, a first-level appellate court has the power to second-guess the trial court's finding of facts and retry the facts of the case at that level under the principle ofdouble degré de juridiction.[4]
In common law jurisdictions, an appellate court reviewing an issue of fact ordinarily gives deference to the trial court's findings.[4] It is the duty of trial judges orjuries to view the evidence firsthand, observewitness testimony, and resolve disputes over what facts are supported by the evidence by making findings of fact. When reviewing lower decisions on an issue of fact, courts of appeal generally look for "clear error". Transposed into civil law terminology, a second-instance proceeding in a common law court is "not a retrial of the parties' dispute but a trial of the first-instance trial"; the appellate court attempts to verify whether the trial was conducted according to correct legal principles and without procedural irregularity, not whether the judgment in the first instance was the right outcome.[5]
An appellate court reviews issues of lawde novo (that is, without deference to the lower court's interpretation) and may reverse or modify the lower court's decision if the appellate court believes the lower court misapplied the facts or the law. The application of the law to the facts (once the facts are established by factfinding in the first instance as explained above) is itself also an issue of law. If the appellate court finds a reversible error on an issue of law, it will reverse and remand with directions. If not promptly reversed by a higher court, the appellate court's ruling on that issue of law becomes final as to the parties and becomes part of thelaw of the case. In contrast, if the appellate court finds a reversible error on an issue of fact, it cannot immediately retry and decide the issue itself in the first instance, based on the evidence already in the record. It can only reverse and remand with instructions to the trial court for a new trial or new findings on that issue. However, such further factfinding proceedings may then be subject to further appeals as to whether they themselves were also procedurally proper and conducted in accordance with the appellate court's directions.
An appellate court may also review the lower judge's discretionary decisions, such as whether the judge properly granted a new trial or disallowed evidence. The lower court's decision is allowed to stand unless it is an "abuse of discretion". This standard tends to be even more deferential than the "clear error" standard.
Before hearing any case, the court must havejurisdiction to consider the appeal. The authority of appellate courts to review the decisions of lower courts varies widely from one jurisdiction to another. In some areas, the appellate court has limited powers of review. Generally, an appellate court's judgment provides the final directive of the appeals court as to the matter appealed, setting out with specificity the court's determination that the action appealed from should be affirmed, reversed, remanded or modified.[6] Depending on the type of case and the decision below, appellate review primarily consists of either an entirely new hearing (a nontrial de novo), a hearing where the appellate court gives deference to the factual findings of the lower court, or a hearing to review particular legal rulings made by the lower court (an appeal on the record).
While many appellate courts have jurisdiction over all cases decided by lower courts, some systems have appellate courts divided by the type of jurisdiction they exercise. Some jurisdictions have specialized appellate courts, such as theTexas Court of Criminal Appeals, which only hears appeals raised in criminal cases, and theU.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which has general jurisdiction but derives most of its caseload from patent cases, on one hand, and appeals from theCourt of Federal Claims on the other. In the United States, Alabama, Tennessee, and Oklahoma also have separate courts of criminal appeals. Texas andOklahoma have the final determination of criminal cases vested in their respective courts of criminal appeals,[7] while Alabama and Tennessee allow decisions of its court of criminal appeals to be finally appealed to the state supreme court.[8][9]
.jpg)
TheHigh Court has appellate jurisdiction over all other courts. Leave must be granted by the court, before the appeal matter is heard. The High Court is paramount to all federal courts. Further, it has an constitutionally entrenched general power of appeal from the Supreme Courts of theStates and Territories.[10][11] Appeals to the High Court are by special leave only, which is generally only granted in cases of public importance, matters involving the interpretation of the Commonwealth Constitution, or where the law has been inconsistently applied across the States and Territories.[citation needed] Therefore, in the vast majority of cases, the appellate divisions of the Supreme Courts of each State and Territory and the Federal Court are the final courts of appeal.[12]
The Court of Appeal of New Zealand, located inWellington, is New Zealand's principal intermediate appellate court.[13] In practice, most appeals are resolved at this intermediate appellate level, rather than in theSupreme Court.[14]
The Court of Appeals of the Philippines is the principal intermediate appellate court of that country. The Court of Appeals is primarily found inManila, with three divisions each inCebu City andCagayan de Oro. Other appellate courts include theSandiganbayan for cases involving graft and corruption, and theCourt of Tax Appeals for cases involving tax. Appeals from all three appellate courts are to theSupreme Court.
TheCourt of Session is the highest national court inScotland in relation tocivil cases. Early judges of the court recorded their decisions and codified the law at a time early in the development of Scots law,[15] leading to the development and distinct character ofScots law.[16] In modern times, the court has ruled on issues of public importance and proceedings of its Inner House have been streamed and recorded since 2023.[17] The court now hears cases from any part of Scotland on any issue, other than criminal cases, which belong to its sister court, theHigh Court of Justiciary. The Court of Session is the Royal Court of Scotland, hearing civil cases in the name of theMonarch.[18] Judges are termed Lords of Council and Session and appointed simultaneously to theCollege of Justice and the High Court of Justiciary. Their number is fixed by statute, currently to 37, although a number of temporary judges assist the court with its workload. The court is led by theLord President of the Court of Session who also heads the Scottish judiciary.[19]
TheHigh Court of Justiciary is thesupremecriminal court inScotland. The High Court is both atrial court and acourt of appeal. As a trial court, the High Court sits on circuit atParliament House or in the adjacent former Sheriff Court building in theOld Town inEdinburgh, or in dedicated buildings inGlasgow andAberdeen. The High Court sometimes sits in various smaller towns in Scotland, where it uses the localsheriff court building. As an appeal court, the High Court sits only in Edinburgh. The High Court will hear appeals from thesheriff courts of Scotland where the trial was undersolemn proceedings; the High Court will also hear referrals onpoints of law from theSheriff Appeal Court, and fromsummary proceedings in the sheriff courts andjustice of the peace courts. Cases can be remitted to the High Court by thesheriff courts afterconviction forsentencing, where a sheriff believes that their sentencing powers are inadequate. The High Court can impose alife sentence but the sheriff has a limit of five years sentencing; both can issue an unlimitedfine.
The Court of Appeal of Sri Lanka, located inColombo, is the second senior court in theSri Lankan legal system.
In the United States, both state andfederal appellate courts are usually restricted to examining whether the lower court made the correct legal determinations, rather than hearing direct evidence and determining what the facts of the case were.[20] Furthermore, U.S. appellate courts are usually restricted to hearing appeals based on matters that were originally brought up before the trial court. Hence, such an appellate court will not consider an appellant's argument if it is based on a theory that is raised for the first time in the appeal.[21]
In most U.S. states, and in U.S. federal courts, parties before the court are allowed one appeal as of right. This means that a party who is unsatisfied with the outcome of a trial may bring anappeal to contest that outcome.[22] However, appeals may be costly, and the appellate court must find an error on the part of the court below that justifies upsetting the verdict.[23] Therefore, only a small proportion of trial court decisions result in appeals.[24] Some courts, particularly supreme courts, have the power ofdiscretionary review, meaning that they can decide whether they will hear an appeal brought in a particular case.[22][23]
Many U.S. jurisdictions title their appellate court acourt of appeal orcourt of appeals.[1] Both terms are used in the United States, but the plural form is more common inAmerican English, while in contrast,British English uses only the singular form.[1] The correct form is whichever is the statutorily prescribed or customary form for a particular court and particular jurisdiction; in other words, one should never write "court of appeal" when the court at issue clearly prefers to be called a "court of appeals", and vice versa.[1]
Historically, certain jurisdictions have titled their appellate court acourt of errors (orcourt of errors and appeals), on the premise that it was intended to correct errors made by lower courts. Examples of such courts include theNew Jersey Court of Errors and Appeals (which existed from 1844 to 1947), the Connecticut Supreme Court of Errors (which has been renamed theConnecticut Supreme Court), the Kentucky Court of Errors (renamed theKentucky Supreme Court), and the Mississippi High Court of Errors and Appeals (since renamed theSupreme Court of Mississippi). In some jurisdictions, a court able to hear appeals is known as anappellate division.
The phrase "court of appeals" most often refers to intermediate appellate courts. However, theNew York Court of Appeals is the highest appellate court in New York. TheNew York Supreme Court is a trial court of general jurisdiction. TheSupreme Court of Maryland was known as the Court of Appeals, and theAppellate Court of Maryland was known as the Court of Special Appeals, until a 2022 constitutional amendment changed their names. Depending on the system, certain courts may serve as both trial courts and appellate courts, hearing appeals of decisions made by courts with more limited jurisdiction.
The book edited below, completed in 1566, is the first comprehensive survey of Scots law. It gathers and summarises a large number of laws from various different sources… The author… was a judge [of the Court of Session]… He wrote the book principally for the use of other judges and advocates in the court.
{{cite book}}:|work= ignored (help)