Civil appeals to the Court of Appeal

NOTE: an updated version of the Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Guide was published on 18 December 2025—a copy is available here. Content on and links to the Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Guide will be updated shortly.

Civil appeals to the County Court, High Court and Court of Appeal are generally governed by CPR 52. General guidance on civil appeals can be found in Civil appeals: general and preliminary considerations—overview.

In addition to the provisions set out in CPR 52 and CPR PD 52A, practitioners appealing in the Court of Appeal also need to comply with the additional provisions set out in CPR PD 52C.

For guidance on appeals to the UK Supreme Court, see: Appeals to the Supreme Court—overview, which links through to further guidance on such appeals.

For detail of the structure and hierarchy of civil courts in England and Wales, see: Courts and Tribunals Judiciary—Structure of Courts and Tribunals System.

Starting an appeal in the Court of Appeal

In addition to the general provisions for starting an appeal contained in CPR PD 52A, an

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

TAKE A FREE TRIAL

Latest PI & Clinical Negligence News

BHP hit with £189m legal costs bill over dam collapse case

Law360, London: On 17 December 2025, lawyers for more than 640,000 individuals argued at court that BHP should pay out £189m (US$254m) of their legal costs after the mining giant was found liable for a dam collapse that triggered Brazil's worst environmental disaster.

The Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Guide 2025 has been updated

The biggest change involves the addition of three new chapters on consent orders, McKenzie Friends and out‑of‑hours applications.

Criminal Injuries Compensation—medical re-opening R (LXR) v FTT and CICA

PI & Clinical Negligence analysis: The Court of Appeal considered the provisions of paragraphs 114 to 116 of the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme 2012 in relation to the circumstances in which a previously decided award can be re-opened on medical grounds. The judgment resulted in the court setting aside the decision of the Upper Tribunal (UT) which in turn had set aside the decision of the First Tier Tribunal (FTT) on judicial review that an application to re-open an award relating to damage to mental health arising out of an earlier incident of sexual abuse should be permitted. The judgment contains a thorough and useful analysis of the factors and considerations to be taken into account in medical re-opening cases and gives emphasis to their fact-sensitive nature. It identifies the error of law on the part of the UT in relation to its approach to the medical evidence that was before the FTT by reference to the way in which medical evidence is to be approached in relation to the Scheme criteria ie whether there has been so material a change in the medical condition of the applicant (appellant) that allowing the original determination to stand would give rise to an injustice. The judgment also dismissed grounds of appeal under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Written by Neil Sugarman, consultant, GLP Solicitors, Bury, Greater Manchester.

CILEX appeals Mazur judgment as hearing date confirmed

The Court of Appeal has confirmed the hearing date for Chartered Institute of Legal Executives' (CILEX) appeal against the Mazur judgment, scheduled for 24 February 2026. The decision has significant implications for legal professionals, law firms, and access to justice, particularly given the judgment's controversial impact on legal precedent. Although CILEX was not directly involved in the initial proceedings, the organization has been granted permission to appeal. Leading legal practitioners, acting pro bono, will represent CILEX, highlighting the case's potential to influence the broader legal landscape.

View PI & Clinical Negligence by content type :

News