CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

Appeal

resort to a superior court to review the decision of an inferior court or administrative agency

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionSep 12, 2026
Entity authorityQ329777 ↗
Source-derived summary

In law, an appeal is the process in which cases or decisions are reviewed by a higher authority, where parties request a formal change to an official decision. Appeals function both as a process for error correction as well as a process of clarifying and interpreting law. Although appellate courts have existed for thousands of years, common law countries did not incorporate an affirmative right to appeal into their jurisprudence until the 19th century.

Terminology

"Appellate review" is the general term for the process by which courts with appellate jurisdiction exercise jurisdiction over matters decided by lower courts. It is distinguished from judicial review, which refers to the court's overriding constitutional or statutory right to determine whether a legislative act or administrative decision is defective for jurisdictional or other reasons (which may vary by jurisdiction).

American English and British English have diverged significantly on the topic of appellate terminology. American cases go up "on appeal" and one "appeals from" (intransitive) or "appeals" (transitive) an order, award, judgment, or conviction, while decisions of British courts are said to be "under appeal" and one "appeals against" a judgment. An American court disposes of an appeal with words like "judgment affirmed" (the appeal is without merit) or "judgment reversed" (the appeal has merit), while a British court disposes of an appeal with words like "appeal dismissed" (the appeal is without merit) or "appeal allowed" (the appeal has merit).

In most jurisdictions the normal and preferred way of seeking appellate review is by filing an appeal against the lower court's judgment.

History

Appellate courts and other systems of error correction have existed for many millennia.

Editorial summary

This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “Appeal” as resort to a superior court to review the decision of an inferior court or administrative agency. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.

Editorial reviewA dependable orientation record for establishing vocabulary, names and a first evidence trail. The current 271-word lead offers orientation but no explicit four-digit date, so chronology should not be assumed. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. The account is most persuasive where Appeal, resort and superior can be independently traced.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The subject matters to the general reference register because the source frames it as resort to a superior court to review the decision of an inferior court or administrative agency. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.

Evidence profile

The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 12, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q329777. The Library of Congress control number is sh85006085. None of the 1 selected statements returned an explicit reference.

Critical limits

A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Appeal”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Appeal primary sources, Appeal archive and Appeal research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Appeal”?
  2. Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
  3. Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Appeal” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.