DECISIONS OF THE COURT OF APPEAL ON APPEAL – THE ISSUE OF THE EFFICIENCY OF THE PROCEEDINGS
DECISIONS OF THE COURT OF APPEAL ON APPEAL – THE ISSUE OF THE EFFICIENCY OF THE PROCEEDINGS

Summary/Abstract: The court of appeal, in principle, decides without holding a hearing during the so-called closed session. After the appellate procedure, the court of appeal will make a decision. The types of decisions made by the appellate court do not depend on the format in which the appellate panel decided (with or without a hearing). However, the decision of the appellate court depends on how the appeal was handled. Namely, the court of appeal may find that the appeal is not suitable for deciding on the merits, then that the appeal is suitable for deciding on the merits but that it is not founded, and finally the court of appeal may find that the appeal is founded. The current Law envisages and limits the types of decisions that court of appeal can make. However, the purpose of this restriction is not to discipline the creativity of the appellate court, the meaning of the restriction is a consequence of a certain functional connection that exists between the error of the first instance court and the need to react to that error appropriately. Second-instance decisions have a different character, they can result in either modification or revocation or confirmation of the first-instance decision. If in the appellate procedure it is assessed that the appeal is founded, than the cassation or audit powers of the second instance court are manifested. Decisions of the court of appeal in the appeal procedure may be different and depend on the results of the examination of the legal remedy, whether the legal remedy is suitable to be the subject of meritorious examination and decision-making.

• Details
• Contents