Jump to content

Leapfrog appeal

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by MrStoofer (talk | contribs) at 09:47, 8 September 2023 (modernising and updating). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

In the courts of England and Wales, a 'leapfrog' appeal is a special and relatively rare form of appeal in which a case is appealed directly from the High Court to the Supreme Court (or previously the House of Lords), thereby skipping the Court of Appeal.

The procedure is governed by Part II of the Administration of Justice Act 1969 as amended. In summary, if the High Court judge considers that the relevant conditions are met, and that the case is suitable for a leapfrog appeal, then they may grant a certificate to that effect (section 12(1) of the Act). If a certificate is granted, any of the parties to the proceedings may apply to the Supreme Court for leave to make a leapfrog appeal, which if granted enables the leapfrog appeal to take place (section 13).

The High Court judge may not grant a certificate unless the "relevant conditions" in section 12(3), or the "alternative conditions" in section 12(3A) are met. The "relevant conditions in section 12(3) are that:

a point of law of general public importance is involved in that decision and that that point of law either—

(a) relates wholly or mainly to the construction of an enactment or of a statutory instrument, and has been fully argued in the proceedings and fully considered in the judgment of the judge in the proceedings, or

(b) is one in respect of which the judge is bound by a decision of the Court of Appeal or of the Supreme Court in previous proceedings, and was fully considered in the judgments given by the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court (as the case may be) in those previous proceedings.

The "alternative conditions" in section 12(3A) are that:

a point of law of general public importance is involved in the decision and that—

(a) the proceedings entail a decision relating to a matter of national importance or consideration of such a matter, (b) the result of the proceedings is so significant (whether considered on its own or together with other proceedings or likely proceedings) that, in the opinion of the judge, a hearing by the Supreme Court is justified, or

(c) the judge is satisfied that the benefits of earlier consideration by the Supreme Court outweigh the benefits of consideration by the Court of Appeal.

Key contemporary examples include the leapfrog appeals in the Miller case, and the Cherry and Miller joint cases, both major judicial review appeals heard by the Supreme Court en banc.

References

See also