Civil Appeals, Revision and Case Law
Foundations
This domain tests the interplay of first and second appeals, revision, and the use of precedent. The candidate must know which forum has which power and how case law binds.
Concepts to master
- First appeal: on facts and law; the appellate court may reappreciate evidence.
- Second appeal: generally confined to substantial questions of law; the court must frame the substantial question at admission.
- Revision: supervisory, not appellate; exercised where the subordinate court exercised jurisdiction not vested, failed to exercise vested jurisdiction, or acted illegally or with material irregularity, causing miscarriage of justice.
- Precedent: ratio decidendi binds; obiter dicta persuade; a decision per incuriam or sub silentio has reduced authority.
- Hierarchy of courts determines binding effect; larger benches bind smaller benches of the same court.
Traps in questions
- Treating a second appeal as a re-hearing on facts.
- Using revision where an appeal lies.
- Confusing ratio decidendi with obiter dicta.
- Ignoring that a substantial question of law must be framed at admission.
Rule of thumb
Facts go to first appeal; law goes to second appeal; jurisdiction goes to revision. Revision is corrective supervision, not a second chance on merits.
Worked example
A lower appellate court dismisses an appeal after reappreciating evidence. The losing party seeks revision alleging the conclusion was wrong. Since the court had jurisdiction and merely decided wrongly on merits, revision is not maintainable; the error, if any, is appealable.