The Hierarchical Structure and Appeals Process in the Court and Tribunal System of England and Wales

Introduction

England and Wales have a court and tribunal system that is fundamental to the country’s legal framework to serve in dispute resolution, maintain justice, and protect laws (Slapper & Kelly, 2003). In the book Law for Business Students (12th Edition), chapter 4, “Resolving Legal Disputes,” Adams et al. describe this system based on a hierarchical system that constitutes different levels of courts and specialized committees with varying powers of jurisdiction. The intent here is to closely examine this complex system by addressing its structural composition and ways of making appeals, specifically relating to England and Wales. This exploration’s main aim will entail outlining court and tribunal organizational frameworks, followed by diving into the entangled maze of court appeals. This section will focus on explaining the roles and functions of various courts as well as differentiation as areas of civil and criminal matters, elaborating mechanisms of appeals within these realms as well. In order to organize this analysis properly, this paper is presented methodically. The investigations will begin with the explorations of the hierarchy, which involves the lower court, like the magistrate’s court and county court, and then going upwards to the high court, the court of appeal, and ultimately, the supreme court. The analysis aims to deconstruct each tier, its specializations, the kinds of cases it handles, and its place in the wider judiciary order. Then, attention will be shifted to what comprises appeals in such a system. The second part focuses on the procedures for filing a request against rulings from subordinate courts such as the Supreme Court and criminal and court appeals. A critical assessment will, however, be woven into this analysis as it seeks to evaluate whether the available appeals processes prove effective, accessible, and efficient and what improvements can be put across. This essay aims to provide a comprehensive and critical overview of the court and tribunal system in England and Wales, unraveling its hierarchical structure and dissecting the intricate web of appeals that define its functionality.

Hierarchical Structure of the Court System

In the book Law for Business Students (12th Edition), chapter 4, “Resolving Legal Disputes,” Adams et al. describe the English legal system as a hierarchical system consisting of both lower courts and higher courts. The chapter proceeds to tell the nature of the tribunal system as discussed below.

Lower Courts

The Magistrates’ Court. This court forms an important pillar in the English and Welsh legal process, having the authority to exercise jurisdiction over certain categories of offenses and, particularly, civil claims. Essentially, it deals with determining guilt or innocence as concerns petty theft, public disorder, traffic infringements, and slight assaults. The other role of this court is to hold preliminary hearings on serious criminal cases that will be later tried in higher courts. In civil affairs, magistrate courts can deal with certain cases, such as family feuds, minor suits, and a handful of licensing issues.

The only characteristic that differentiates the Magistrate’s Court is the use of lay magistrates or district judges. The people who do not have law degrees complete full training and sit with legal advisers to make decisions in courts. The fusion of legal competency and community interest portrays an accessible court with intimate knowledge of local peculiarities. On the other hand, the Civil Court becomes vital, whereby it handles a wide range of civil litigations involving instances such as breach of contracts, injuries, consumer cases, and others. Its services are spread across different regions and offer channels through which the complainants can look for solutions to their problems.

County Court. This court provides a more easygoing atmosphere than higher courts that, in some cases, allows for parties to appear without legal representation. It plays a role in settling disputes between people who may find it difficult or expensive to go through litigation.

In addition, County Courts have assigned circuit judges or district judges who supervise such activities with complete justification. Being a primary source for the resolution of various cases that fall under its extensive domain in civil matters makes it an important pillar within the judicial system of England and Wales.

Superior Courts

High Court. The High Court stands as a bastion of judicial authority, divided into three specialized divisions: Queen’s Bench, Chancery, and Family Division. Each division caters to distinct categories of cases.

1. Queen’s Bench Division: Handles issues mostly related to general civil litigation, such as contracts, personal injuries, or administrative lawsuits.It covers several civil claims, giving relief, or resolving different matters.
2. Chancery Division: Cases involving business, property, trusts, wills, as well as intellectual property rights.It deals with sophisticated commercial litigation, bankruptcy procedures, and chancery matters, focusing mainly on high-level professional services relating thereto.
3. Family Division: Determine cases related to families, like divorces, custody battles, and issues concerning children.It is central to solving the problems that lead to family breakdowns and protecting weak people (Maican, 2021).

Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal is the principal appeal court, which handles appeals from the High Court as well as some tribunals earmarked for industrial matters and rent review. It is a reviewing court comprised of civil and criminal divisions that examine cases based on errors in law and not factual errors. It has great importance in the legal system and represents an important remedy for parties who are not pleased with previous court judgments. The significance of this authority lies in its ability to subject legal decisions to review and set precedents for the development and unity of the law.

Supreme Court. The Supreme Court is the highest judiciary organ in Britain, and it has jurisdiction over cases of great public interest or those concerning constitutional issues. It usually considers appeals on matters of law that aim at standardizing and clearing up any ambiguities in case interpretation all over the nation. However, this court is significant because it hands down verdicts that have repercussions for the law of the land that serve as precedence for future judgments. It is final and conclusive in every sense of the word. Lower courts rely on their decisions while setting precedents for the masses. Moreover, the Supreme Court plays a pivotal role in safeguarding constitutional rights, ensuring the rule of law, and upholding justice in England and Wales.

Specialist Tribunals

Employment Tribunal

Most employees in England and Wales settle their disputes at the Employment Tribunal, which caters to issues within the scope of employment law. Its primary focus revolves around adjudicating on a wide spectrum of employment-related matters, including but not limited to the following:

1. Unfair Dismissal: Unfair dismissal claims.
2. Discrimination Claims: Complaints related to acts of discrimination in areas of age, sex, race, disability, and faith.
3. Wage Disputes: Grievances regarding matters of unpaid wages, bonus payments, or breaches of employment contracts
4. Employment Rights: Assertions concerning working hours, holiday entitlements, and other employees’ rights.

In most cases, they operate in a user-friendly format where the litigants can present their arguments orally. This fast-track approach that targets employment issues makes it a necessary channel through which employees and employers can address their workplace grievances.

Lands Tribunal

On the other hand, the Land’s Tribunal focuses on matters relating to land and properties, including varied elements falling under this category. Its jurisdiction includes but is not limited to:

1. Property Valuation: Achieving resolutions with respect to the evaluation of land and buildings.
2. Leasehold and Freehold Matters: Disputes concerning lease extensions, enfranchisement, and conflicts between landlord and tenancy.
3. Town Planning Disputes: The planning commission considers problems such as planning permissions and land utilization, among other things.

The Lands Tribunal acts as a specialist forum where complex real estate issues are resolved in an efficient way using specialized knowledge of property statutes. Ensures clarity and equitableness through settlement of disputes concerning land and property ownership.

Appeals Process within the System

Civil Appeals

In the civil justice system of England and Wales, the appeal process serves as a crucial mechanism for parties dissatisfied with lower court judgments to seek redressal and potentially rectify errors in legal interpretation or procedure (Sorabji, 2021). The route of appeals from lower courts to higher courts involves a structured progression through tiers of the judicial hierarchy.

Appeals from County Court to Higher Courts. The appeal process typically begins at the County Court, where civil cases are initially heard. If either party is dissatisfied with the County Court’s decision, they may seek permission to appeal to the appropriate higher court, usually the High Court.

1. County Court to High Court: Appeals from the County Court generally proceed to the High Court if substantial grounds for appeal exist. The High Court reviews the case on legal points or procedural errors rather than re-examining evidence. If the High Court deems the request worthy, it may overturn, uphold, or remit the case back to the lower court for reconsideration.
2. High Court to Court of Appeal: Parties further dissatisfied with the High Court’s decision may seek permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal considers appeals on matters of law or procedure, aiming to clarify legal principles and ensure consistency in judicial decisions.

Criminal Appeals

The pathway of criminal appeals entails a structured progression through tiers of courts, starting from the Magistrates’ Court.

Pathway of Criminal Appeals

2. Magistrates’ Court to Crown Court: Individuals dissatisfied with the decision of the Magistrates’ Court, whether on conviction or sentencing, can appeal to the Crown Court. This appeal is a re-hearing of the case and may involve new evidence or legal arguments.
3. Crown Court to Court of Appeal: If an appellant remains dissatisfied with the Crown Court’s decision, they can seek permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, hears appeals based on errors of law, unfair trials, or excessive sentences. It reviews cases and can affirm, reverse, or amend judgments, aiming to rectify legal errors or procedural irregularities.
4. Appeals to the Supreme Court: Cases from the Court of Appeal can be further appealed to the Supreme Court only if they involve points of law of general public importance. The significance of the legal case is more important in The Supreme Court because it is the determining factor for the appeal request to be accepted. Matters of national importance are mostly considered for appeal at this court, and individual cases are not easily appealed in The Supreme Court. Appeals involving criminal cases are rarely made in this court since the court only considers issues that have significant legal principles or points of constitutional importance (Richard, 2020).

Tribunals Appeals

For appeals from specialized tribunals, a structured procedure is always followed. This often involves internal reviews and subsequent escalation through higher courts. This is further discussed below:

1. Internal Reviews within Tribunals: Tribunals frequently offer an internal review process, allowing parties that feel dissatisfied with the initial decision in the lower tribunal to ask for reconsideration but within the same tribunal. The main goal of this process is to correct any errors or oversights that might have occurred during the hearing process without involving higher courts and Tribunals.
2. Appeals to the Upper Tribunal: In any case, when both parties or a single party remain dissatisfied after the internal Review is completed and a decision rendered, they are allowed to appeal to the Upper Tribunal if they wish to. The Upper Tribunal serves as a higher forum whose main role is to review decisions that have been made by lower tribunals in case of any appeal made. The Upper Tribunal mainly re-examines and reviews cases based on points of law or procedural irregularities that may have occurred during the hearing process in the lower tribunals.
3. Potential Escalation to Higher Courts: This rarely occurs, but in exceptional cases, discontented parties may still seek permission to appeal to higher courts, such as the Court of Appeal or, in very rare instances, the Supreme Court. However, this escalation usually occurs when the disputed cases involve significant points of law or have wider implications beyond the specific dispute.

Critical Assessment

Efficiency of Appeals Process: The efficiency of the appeals process within the English and Welsh legal systems is a critical element that has a great influence on the overall accessibility and effectiveness of justice. The strengths and weaknesses of the appeal process are evident after a critical analysis of the process’ accessibility, timeliness, and usefulness across different case types.

Comparative Analysis

Despite the fact that the English court system is different from most other legal systems, it shares some similarities with them. It is important to note that each legal system possesses unique structures and different hearing processes and procedures during the appeal process.

Similarities.

1. Hierarchy of Courts: Many jurisdictions’ court systems are in a hierarchical manner, which involves both lower and higher courts. This is witnessed in countries like Scotland and the USA.
2. Appellate Review: Most of the legal systems also feature appellate reviews where decisions from the lower courts can be reviewed by the higher courts in case an appeal is made by any of the parties who feel dissatisfied by the decision made by the lower courts.

Differences

1. Scotland: Scotland’s legal system greatly differs from the legal system in England and Wales. The differences occur where Scotland has distinct courts, such as the Court of Session. This court serves as both a court of first instance and an appellate court (Keegan, 2021).
2. USA: The U.S. legal system, unlike the English legal system, consists of federal and state courts. Each of these courts has its appeal processes. The U.S. Supreme Court holds broad appellate jurisdiction. This is different from the U.K.’s Supreme Court, which has discretionary Review, where it only selects cases that it hears (Friedman & Hayden, 2017).
3. European Court of Human Rights: This court operates at an international level and allows individuals in any of the member states to bring cases where there has been a violation of human rights, but only if they have exhausted their domestic remedies (Leach, 2011). The role of this court differs significantly from the appellate courts in England and Wales.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the hierarchical structure of the English legal system, alongside the procedures followed during the hearing and appeal processes, are the major building blocks to a robust system that plays a fundamental role in terms of justice delivery to all affected parties. This is achieved through dispute resolutions and upholding the rule of law. In reflection, while the system provides essential mechanisms for justice, improving accessibility, streamlining processes to reduce delays, and addressing costs could enhance its effectiveness. Greater support for litigants without legal representation and measures to expedite appeals would significantly benefit the system’s overall efficacy and fairness.

References

Leach, P. (2011). Taking a case to the European Court of Human Rights. Oxford University Press, USA.

Maican, O. H. The English judicial system. In Expanding Edges of Today’s Administrative Law (pp. 228–236). Societatea de Stiinte Juridice si Administrative.

McKeever, G. (2020). Comparing courts and tribunals through the lens of legal participation. Civil Justice Quarterly, 39(3), 217–236.

Richard Aikens, R. H. S. (2020). “Chapter 5 U.K. – England and Wales”. In Courts in Evolving Societies. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill | Nijhoff. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004438248_006

Sorabji, J. (2021). Structure of the Court System and Case Management: Lessons from England & Wales. Civil Case Management in the Twenty-First Century: Court Structures Still Matter, pp. 137–152.

Slapper, G., & Kelly, D. (2003). The English legal system. Routledge-Cavendish.

Stephens, M. (2013). England and Wales. International Libel and Privacy Handbook: A Global Reference for Journalists, Publishers, Webmasters, and Lawyers, pp. 341–356.

Administrative Court – GOV. U.K. (www.gov.uk) (accessed 22^nd November 2023).

Cownie, F., Bradney, A., & Burton, M. (2013). English Legal System in Context 6e. American Chemical Society.

Drewry, G. (2009). The judicialisation of ‘Administrative’tribunals in the U.K.: From Hewart to Leggatt. Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences, 5(28), 45–64.

Faulkner, D. (2010). The justice system in England and Wales. Forensic Psychology, pp. 17–32.

Business Law, Marson, J. & Ferris, K. (6th Edition) https://books.google.co.ke/books?id=Yra6BwAAQBAJ&lpg=PP1&pg=PP1#v=onepage&q&f=false

Friedman, L. M., & Hayden, G. M. (2017). American law: An introduction. Oxford University Press.

Introduction to Business Law, Jones, L. (4th Edition) https://books.google.co.ke/books?id=Bfh0DgAAQBAJ&lpg=PP1&pg=PP1#v=onepage&q&f=false

Keegan, G. (2021). Scottish legal system essentials. Edinburgh University Press.

Law for Business Students, Adams, A. (12th Edition) https://books.google.co.ke/books?id=geksEAAAQBAJ&lpg=PP1&pg=PT20#v=onepage&q&f=false