civil appeals and evaluation Flashcards
when do they need to be submitted by (how long)
up to 21 days after decision made
is there an automatic right to appeal
no permission needs to be given
this is generally only given when it is likely the appeal will succeed
what must the appeal be based on (3)
error of law- the judge who made the decision interpreted the law incorrectly
error of fact- either the judge didn’t understand the facts correctly, or the parties did not submit all of the facts correctly in the first trial
procedural unfairness- some element of the trial procedure unfairly affected one of the parties. This may include that they were not given time to put their case forward, or that there is found to be some bias such as a connection with the judge and one of the parties
what does the first appeal hearing depend on
the “track” the case was allocated to, and where the initial case was heard
if its a small claims track where would the original hearing be
Small Claims Track
County court/ district judge
if its a fast claims track where would the original hearing be
County court/ district judge
or county court/circuit judge
if its a multi track case where would the original hearing be
High court or county court/ high court judge or circuit judge
if its a small track case where would the first hearing be
County court/circuit judge
if its a fast track case where would the first hearing be
County court/ circuit judge
High court/ high court judge
if its a multi track case where would the first hearing be
Court of appeal only if conditions are met
if needed, where is the second appeal held
court of appeal
what act is needed for the second appeal
Access to Justice Act 1999, s.55
what does this act mean
an appeal of a civil case to the court of appeal (civil division) is only allowed if permission is granted by the court of appeal
permission will be granted of
the case raises an important point of law
or
the court feels there is another compelling reason to allow the appeal
in what type of case does these rules apply to the first hearing
multi track
appeals to the supreme court
A final appeal to the Supreme Court (formerly House of Lords) will only be allowed in exception circumstances. It must be a case of public/national importance, and the Supreme Court must give their permission which is why they see around200 per year
leapfrog procedure
some cases may be able to ‘leapfrog’ the court of appeal and go directly to the supreme court for the appeal hearing
this would only be allowed in exceptional circumstances if
issue is of national/public importance
it’s an issue important enough to warrant allowing the leapfrog
the court of appeal is bound by its own previous precedent and only the supreme court can overrule the precedent
reforms of the civil courts
Lord Woolf Reforms 1999
Lord Briggs 2016
Intermediate Track 2023
what did Lord Woolf Reforms 1999 do
brought in 3 tracks in 1999
gas ped to more cooperation and less days
but still lengthy and still too expensive
what did Lord Briggs 2016 do
Online courts introduced for claims up to £25000
what did Intermediate Track 2023 do
Introduced in 2023 to speed up the process
evaluation- positive points
fair
judge is a legal expert
enforceable
appeals process
fair dev
rules pf precedent create consistency between cases
This ultimately makes the outcome fair, judges are neutral and not biased
fair extra
Alternatives to court (e.g arbitration) do not follow these same rules so court is best
judge is legal expert dev
judges are legally trained and experienced. Leads to correct legal outcomes
judge is legal expert extra
Especially in specialty divisions of the high court
enforceable dev
decisions of the court are legally binding. Parties have to stick to them or face consequences
enforceable extra
Alternatives to court (e.g mediation) don’t provide this certainty of outcomes
appeals process dev
civil courts provides clear appeals process if there are errors or unfairness
appeals process extra
civil courts provides clear appeals process if there are errors or unfairness
evaluation- negative
too expensive
inequality
damages future relationships
lacks technological knowledge
too expensive dev
Pay for the use of court and legal fees and potential compensation all add up
too expensive extra
Losing party also has to pay the costs of the other party- if claimant loose alsi have to cover defendants and vise versa
inequality dev
If one party has access to extra recources can become unfair (e.g wuality of lawyers)
inequality extra
Ineuwualiry can be reason to appeal to ECtHR which is the european courts of human rights (but will parties bother?)
damages future relationships dev
Court is adversiarial (battle) with winner and loser- damages relationships (e.g in business and family law)
damages future relationships extra
Alternatives to court (e.g mediation) allow parties to communicate rather than battle
lacks technological knowledge dev
Judges are legal experts but may not be ex[erts on area pf the case (e.g specific business topics)= wrong outcomes
lacks technological knowledge extra
Altertaives to court (e.g arbitration use ecperts specialised in the topic
