The recent amendment to Federal Decree-Law No. 42 of 2022 on the Civil Procedures Law has introduced a notable procedural concept through Paragraph 3 of Article 167. This paragraph establishes, for the first time, the Court of Appeal's ability to decide certain appeals directly in the deliberation chamber—without holding a public hearing.
Paragraph 3 of Article 167 states:
"The court shall decide on the appeal in the deliberation chamber within twenty (20) working days by a judgment or a reasoned decision on the merits of the appeal, whether by ruling it inadmissible, not permitted, forfeited, or by upholding the appealed judgment or decision. The court may also schedule a hearing to consider the merits of the case if necessary..."
This amendment introduces an exclusive set of circumstances in which the Court of Appeal may decide upon a matter in the deliberation chamber without holding a hearing. These include:
- Ruling the appeal inadmissible
- Declaring it not permitted
- Declaring it forfeited
- Upholding the appealed judgment or decision
This procedural shortcut represents an exception to the general rule that requires appeals to be heard in open court with both parties present. As an exception to a foundational principle of due process, it must be narrowly construed.
Where the Court of Appeal finds that the appeal raises substantive issues requiring a reexamination of the merits and the evidence presented by the parties (outside the four scenarios listed above), it must hold a hearing where both parties are duly summoned and given the opportunity to submit evidence, present legal arguments, and respond to each other's claims.
The Court may not issue a decision that alters or departs from the appealed judgment while sitting in the deliberation chamber, unless the appeal falls squarely within the expressly provided exceptions.
Procedural rules of this nature are deemed matters of public policy (ordre public), which courts must observe ex officio. As further reinforced by Article 180 of the Civil Procedure Law, the integrity of judicial proceedings and the rights of the parties must be preserved through strict compliance with procedural safeguards.
This latest amendment reflects an effort to increase judicial efficiency while maintaining fundamental procedural protections. However, it also places renewed responsibility on litigators and judges alike to ensure appeals are properly classified and handled according to the exact wording of the law.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
