APPELLATE COURT POWERS AND PROCEDURES

1 In relation to an appeal the appellate court has all the powers of the lower court. Appellate tribunals can affirm, set aside or vary any order made or judgment 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 costs orders. Appellate tribunals are usually reluctant¹ to overrule lower courts decisions on questions of fact, unless they are clearly erroneous, and so will focus on the application of the law to those facts. Generally speaking the appellate court decides whether the decision was legally sound or not; consequently argument on appeals can be directed towards legal errors allegedly committed at the trial.

If the appellate court finds no defect, it "affirms" the judgment. If there is a legal defect in the decision "below" ², it may " modify " the ruling to correct the defect, or it may nullify ("reverse" or "vacate") the whole decision or any part of it. It may, in addition, send the case back (" remand " or "remit") to the lower court for further proceedings to remedy the defect. Sometimes, the appellate court finds a defect in the procedure the parties used in filing the appeal and dismisses the appeal without considering its merits.

2 Though the specific procedures for appealing can vary greatly from country to country however generally there is no trial in an appellate court. In modern practice most appeals are limited to a review of the decision of the lower tribunal; a full rehearing is allowed only in some circumstances. The appellate court examines a transcript or note of the evidence heard in the trial and the law applied; records of all pre-trial and trial proceedings are also reviewed.

When a case is appealed, the appellant has the opportunity topresent arguments for the grantingof the appeal and the respondent can present arguments against it. Arguments of the parties to the appeal are presented in written appellate briefsnormally submitted by their appellate lawyers. The appellant is limited to arguing only the narrow points of law, or law and fact, on which the appeal has been granted. The opposing party is required to respond to the petition, oral arguments and legal briefs of the counterpart. In general, a respondent takes the procedural position that the lower court decision should be upheld but he may bring a cross-appeal as well.

After the briefs are reviewed, attorneys for each party may argue their positions in oral arguments before a panel of judges at a hearing. At such hearings each party is allowed a brief presentation at which the appellate judges ask questions based on their review of the record below and the submitted briefs. Then the judges make a decision and issue a formal opinion.

3 In England and Wales appeals are heard by a judge of the next most appropriate level ³, rather than the next highest court. A circuit judge in the county court is able to hear appeals from the small claims track decided by a district judge. Civil appeals from High Court masters, district judges, and county court circuit judges are usually considered by a single High Court judge, but, as an exception, they may lie to the Court of Appeal (e.g. a final decision in a multi-track claim). Two or more High Court judges have jurisdiction to hear appeals sitting as a Divisional Court. From the High Court cases may go on appeal to the civil division of the Court of Appeal or, when points of law of general public importance are involved, to the House of Lords, bypassing the Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal (Civil Division) is able to hear appeals from the county courts under the leapfrog procedure and appeals from the High Court. The House of Lords will hear appeals primarily from the Court of Appeal but can hear leapfrog appeals from the High Court. The Lord Chancellor is able “by order” ⁴ to vary routes of appeal if he considers it appropriate.

In matters of European Community law, the European Court of Justice has the authority to overrule any national civil court decision. Individuals, groups, or organizations who consider themselves to be victims of a breach of the European Convention on Human Rights, and who have failed to find a remedy in the national courts, may appeal to the Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.

II. DEVELOPMENT

1. Scan the text to find the words which mean:

a. процесуальний суперник;

b. помилковий;

c. підтримати рішення нижчого суду;

d. скасувати рішення нижчого суду;

e. зустрічна апеляційна скарга.

Поиск по сайту: