Britannica
Sources used in this answer
How do appellate courts review decisions made by trial courts?
Created from Britannica articles
using AI.
AI can make mistakes, so verify using Britannica articles.
Court
Judge's bench in a courtroom in Nevada, U.S.
Appellate courts review decisions made by trial courts through three primary methods, depending on the legal system and the level of the court involved:1
- Trial de novo: The appellate court conducts a retrial, hearing evidence and making fresh findings of fact as if it were the original court. This is typically reserved for cases where the initial trial was held in an "inferior" court that kept no formal record.1
- Dossier-based review: The court relies on a record compiled in the lower court. While the appellate court has the power to hear witnesses or take additional evidence, it often relies on the existing record to reach its own findings of fact and conclusions of law.1
- Record-based review: The court reviews only the written record of the proceedings to identify serious legal or procedural errors. This method focuses on questions of law rather than fact, and the court does not receive new evidence.1
In common-law systems, appellate courts generally review the record to determine if a "harmful error" occurred that likely affected the judgment. They typically affirm the lower court's decision unless they find a clear error of law or fact.2