Section 232: Trial court screening of appeals

Supreme Court decisions interpreting this section

1. Supreme Court Judgment No. 677/2563 (2020)

   It is the duty of the court of first instance under Section 232 to examine an appeal and order it forwarded or refused. Where a party seeks to adopt an earlier appeal that has already lapsed, that appeal is unlawful, and the court should refuse to forward it and require a fresh appeal within a set time.

   After the case was reset and judgment given afresh, the plaintiff tried to rely on an earlier appeal that had already lapsed. The Supreme Court held that this was an unlawful appeal, and that under Section 232 the trial court should have refused to forward it and required the plaintiff to file a fresh appeal within a set period.

2. Supreme Court Judgment No. 10115/2558 (2015)

   Depositing the fees payable to the other party under the trial court's order is the appellant's own duty. Where the deposit is incomplete, the court need not notify the appellant to correct it before examining the appeal, since this is not a failure to pay court fees under Section 18 read with Section 232.

   The defendants did not deposit in full the fees payable to the plaintiff as ordered. The Supreme Court held that this was the defendants' own duty and, not being a court-fee defect under Section 18 read with Section 232, the court did not have to prompt correction; even though the trial court had accepted the appeal, it did not thereby become lawful.

Curated decisions with case numbers verified against the Supreme Court database. English renderings are the firm's editorial translation for study.