What does “the appeal reaches the briefing stage” mean?
The court may dismissal the appeal summarily if it determines it lacks jurisdiction to consider the merits. The underlying trial order may not be final for appellate purposes on its face, or the notice of appeal may not have been filed within 30 days. Or maybe a (presumably pro se) litigant has filed the notice of appeal with the wrong appellate court. I’m sure there are a few other grounds for summary disposition.
Sometimes I wonder if this is true. 
Dismiss, that is. :smack:
I think you overestimate how long it takes to put a point across, with sufficient depth in oral arguement; the general rule of thumb is that one minute of oral advocacy is as detailed as a page of written arguments. Appellate Advocacy is about correcting errors made below and points of law, not of a detailed discussion/appreciation of the evidence and issues as the trial is.
Judges and lawyers are very good getting to the the crux of the issue with alacrity and dealing with it succiently. Not all grounds are created equally, your case is stronger in some and weaker in others and very quickly after proceedings commence you will get a feel as to the benchs mood, whether they wish for a consise statement of the matter, or just want to be satisfied on one or two point, upon which relief will be granted, or are skeptical but willing to be convinced or have already made up their minds (you are then fucked).
30 minutes is a looooooong time and frankly if you cannot convince a person (s) in 10 minutes, you are not going to do it in 2 hours. When you are up there every minuite feels like an hour.
WHat you say does not sound much different the our procedure, the Appellate Court will only fix a matter for hearing if all technical formalities have been complied with and the Appeal has been admitted on certain grounds (contentions raised need consideration, they are’nt6 totally without merit).
Well, sort of. What I’m saying is that here the court may not fix the matter for hearing even if all techicalities have been satisfied and the appeal has merit - though that does not mean it will not reverse the order under review.
How common is that? Are you talking about summary reversals, where an error is ex facie; say like when a Coirt entertained a suit sans jurisdiction, or in a regular contested appeal.
Quite common. As the rule I quoted above notes, oral argument is granted at the court’s discretion. I don’t really do appellate practice but all the case law that governs my field comes from two appellate courts, so I follow them quite closely. They only hear argument about 50% of the time even in close cases; otherwise, they will just rule based on the briefs and the record. Quite often they will request additional briefing on a particular issue, though.
AK84, do the Pakistani courts retain the English courts’ custom of not calling on a party (usually the Respondent) if they are satisfied the other party’s case is not convincing?
The High Courts I have appeared before regularly (Islamabad, Lahore and Peshawar. yes they do. Don’t know about others; but I would think so. Known as "dismissed in liminie
Interesting. We just say “not called on.”
Those are very impressive court houses, by the way. (Had to wait to come home to my laptop to look at them; didn’t show well on my mobile.)
Just as a follow-up: I was at a Canadian Bar Association professional development session earlier today, and one of the topics was oral advocacy.
One of the panelists was a justice of our provincial Court of Appeal. She explained that the day of the hearing, the justices hearing the appeal meet, having read the briefs, and discuss the case. That gives them a tentative idea of where they are leaning.
Then there’s the hearing, which is usually a couple of hours.
She said that she estimates that in about 30% of the cases, she or one of her colleagues comes away from the hearing with a change in her tentative opinion about how to decide the case.
Two things: first, no doubt Robinette did in fact devote considerable attention to the Howe Sound case in his factum (no more than 40 pages, by the way, not 200. The SCC has strict page limits.)
Second, it’s not like he gave his line, sat down, and the justices said, “By God, he’s right! Appeal allowed!” That opening line was how he caught their attention and framed the argument, but that by itself wouldn’t win the case. That would have been followed by an hour or two of detailed exposition of the law, back and forth with the justices, and having to respond to the critiques and questions from the Bench. Then the justices would reserve their decision, to consider it in more detail.
The point of the opening line is that good oral advocacy can help frame the debate with the Court.
:D:D:D