New Criminal Appeal rules

The Court of Appeal has released a new practice statement on criminal appeals, following amendments to Chapter VI of the Supreme Court Rules. These amendments follow what seemed to be a short consultation process in the last weeks of December last year.

The amendments expand the single-judge leave process that has been used in sentence appeals to conviction appeals, as well as placing more emphasis on the role of trial counsel. As part of this, the court has abolished the old practice of a notice of appeal, with a full statement of grounds to follow. Instead, the application for leave to appeal must state the specific grounds of appeal (grounds in general terms are not sufficient) and be accompanied by a written case. The written case must concisely outline the argument sought to be relied upon with reference to sections of the transcript and any relevant authorities Parties will, however, have a chance to revise the grounds of appeal within 21 days after receiving the relevant parts of the transcript. In addition, applications for leave will generally, unless a party requests otherwise, be determined based on written submissions, rather than a full hearing. Where a hearing is required, time limits apply, with 15 minutes for the applicant and 10 minutes for the respondent.

The new rules also aim to increase the number of cases resolved on the day. As part of that, an expanded registry will provide, after consultation with the parties, a neutral summary of the facts, grounds of appeal an written case, which will provide the basis for the court's judgment.

The rules clearly are a significant change in how appeals are handled and practitioners will need to be aware of the changes in order to comply with the tight time frames for preparing the grounds of appeal and written case. The practice direction also make it clear that trial counsel are expected to prepare and sign the grounds of appeal and written case where counsel advises an appeal. I suspect that this is meant to ensure the appeal relates to the real issues in the trial and reduces the incidence of cases being radically recast on appeal (the problem of the 'armchair appeal'). Whether this reduces the role of specialist appellate counsel remains to be seen.