SOME CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING APPEAL EFFECTS IN JORDANIAN LEGISLATION

SOME CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING APPEAL EFFECTS IN JORDANIAN LEGISLATION Associate professor Corina PETICĂ ROMAN1 Abstract In the civil tradition, the right of appeal has a primary importance, as a fundamental safeguard of justice. The function of the Court of Appeal is to provide an appellate hearing of right, from any judicial decision of courts of first instance. On this occasion the entire record is brought before the superior Court for consideration and review, both the facts and the law. In Jordan, Courts of Appeal hear all cases of appeal from judgements of the Court of First Instance and all cases of appeal from the Magistrate’s Court, which are not heard by Courts of First Instance. A three judge panel considers all matters raised in the Court of Appeal. Keywords: Court of Appeal, appellate hearing, judgement, courts of first instance, three judge panel, double jurisdiction. JEL Classification: K41 1. Introductory considerations The approach to the aspects concerning the institution of the appeal in the Jordanian legislation, had as considerations the surprising similarities with the way in which the appeal is regulated in the Romanian legislation. Although in the judicial system in Jordan there is a welldefined structure of religious courts, common law (secular) courts are equally represented, which operate according to rules and based on regulations similar to those we encounter in Europe, suffering mainly from the influences of French law. Justice in Jordan is based on principles that support and determine the premises/legal framework, to allow the judge to perform the act of justice. The Constitution, for its part, supports the citizen's right to request the help of justice, derived from the much more general right to petition, considering that this way satisfies the need of those who seek to establish the legal truth or, as the case may be, restore it. 2 This is where the strength of the judicial system resides: every citizen feels that he will regain his rights if he resorts to justice, as a natural consequence of trust in the legislative power and later in the judicial power, called to apply legal norms and rebalance the balance of justice. Thus, the legislator established the legal framework that allows access to justice, the procedures and deadlines for the exercise of rights. In the same sense, rules were developed that regulate the formal requirements of a petition (demands), the right to defense, the means of probation, the equal treatment applied to the litigating parties, the right of the judge to insist by all means to find out the truth, so that, in finally, to pronounce a thorough and legal solution, by which to restore the right, forcing the other party to comply. The administration of justice is at the same time an act charged with solemnity, being the expression of a duty of honor and conscience, which the judge assumes at the time of his inauguration. The role of justice in a modern society is to restore social order whenever it is violated or ignored, instilling a sense of security in citizens and being a guarantor of the rule of law. Compliance with the law is done, in principle, without judicial intervention, because citizens obey the legal regulations, either out of conviction or out of natural fear of the coercive force of the state, which has specific means and tools to penalize/sanction it.3 However, human nature has imposed, over time, the intersection of conflicting interests and rights between individuals or groups of individuals, thus giving rise to conflicts that, in turn, have generated litigation. Rights can be exercised and capitalized to the extent that someone watches over 1 Corina Petică Roman - Faculty of Law, "Lucian Blaga" University of Sibiu, Romania, . Mohammad Hamed Fahmi, Civil and Commercial Procedures, 1940 edition, p. 25. 3 Mohammad Al-Kilani, Explaining the Procedure of Civil Lawsuits. second edition, year 2006. 2 Perspectives of Law and Public Administration Volume 11, Issue 3, October 2022 457 how this is done, and this is where the role of justice comes into play. Its activity can only be effective if its independence is ensured, a real separation of powers being necessary in the state. In the absence of this independence, the act of justice remains a formal approach, intended to offer only the appearance of a guarantee of stability 4. Judicial intervention will take place to restore due respect for the law, penalizing any person who acts against it. From the perspective of access to justice and the degrees of jurisdiction, we identify in Jordanian legislation, as in that of Romania, the presence of the principle of the double degree of jurisdiction. The principle of "judgment on two levels" gives the chance, for the party against whom a decision was made, to "present" the dispute before a higher court, to reanalyze the case. Thus, Jordanian courts are grouped into: - First degree courts, those that judge the litigation for the first time (judgment on the merits). - Second degree courts, the courts that are charged with verifying and "correcting" the solutions of the first courts. These are considered appellate courts. The principle of the double degree of jurisdiction is one of the general principles on which contemporary judicial activity is based for the smooth running of justice. 5 It "urges" the courts of the first degree to pronounce their sentences with responsibility in order to prevent their annulment, abolition or modification by the courts of the second degree. In addition to this fact, it satisfies the need for justice of the "convicted" (fallen in claims), by giving him the chance to present his litigation before a higher court, whose judges are more numerous and more experienced vast. Aspects related to the exercise of the appeal, categories of decisions that can be appealed, formal requirements, etc. were analyzed in a previous paper, so that the present approach is limited to the effects of the call. 2. The effects of the appeal on the contested decisions The appeal request invests the court with its judgment, which essentially represents a new judgment on the merits (devolutionary effect of the appeal). However, although the appeal court's prerogatives are generous, allowing it to verify not only legality aspects but also those of merit, its activity must be limited to the limits of the appellant's investment, according to the request made by him. In this way, the entire case file can be "re-evaluated" (evidential aspects, invoked exceptions and defenses, formulated requests). If justified, some of these can be reiterated and even supplemented, provided they do not exceed the limits established by law. The goal is, in the end, for the hierarchically superior court to exercise real control over the activity of the first court and to be able to pronounce a thorough and legal decision, justified by the evidence administered and retained in the considerations. There is no doubt that these c (...truncated)