United States
Federal appeals courts in the United States sometimes grant rehearing to reconsider the decision of a panel of the court (consisting of only three judges) in which the case concerns a matter of exceptional public importance or the panel's decision appears to conflict with a prior decision of the court. In rarer instances, an appellate court will order hearing ''en banc'' as an initial matter instead of the panel hearing it first. Cases in United States courts of appeals are heard by three-judge panels, randomly chosen from the sitting appeals court judges of that circuit. If a party loses before a circuit panel, it may appeal for a rehearing ''en banc''. A majority of the active circuit judges must agree to hear or rehear a case ''en banc''. The Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure state that ''en banc'' proceedings are disfavored but may be ordered to maintain uniformity of decisions within the circuit or if the issue is exceptionally important (Fed. R. App. P. 35(a)). Each federal circuit has its own particular rules regarding ''en banc'' proceedings. The circuit rules for the Seventh Circuit provide a process where, under certain circumstances, a panel can solicit the consent of the other circuit judges to overrule a prior decision and thus avoid the need for an ''en banc'' proceeding. Federal law provides that for courts with more than 15 judges, an ''en banc'' hearing may consist of "such number of members of its ''en banc'' courts as may be prescribed by rule of the court of appeals." The Ninth Circuit, with 29 judges, uses this procedure, and its ''en banc'' court consists of 11 judges. Theoretically, the Ninth Circuit can render ''en banc'' decisions with all 29 judges participating; such a hearing would overrule a prior 11-judge ''en banc'' hearing on the same case. Though no rule exists barring a party from requesting such a hearing, none has ever been granted. The Fifth Circuit, with 17 judges, adopted a similar procedure in 1986. ''State of La. ex rel. Guste v. M/V TESTBANK'', 752 F.2d 1019 (5th Cir. 1985) (en banc). The Sixth Circuit has 16 judges, but , has not adopted such a policy yet. The FISA Court sat en banc for the first time in 2017 in a case concerning bulk data collection.United Kingdom
The UK Supreme Court has criteria in place to determine the size of the panel that sits on any one case, and particularly important cases can be heard by a panel comprising all but one of the justices. This has been described as sitting ''en banc'' by Lady Hale, then President of the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court has twelve justices, and cases are ordinarily decided by panels of five. The largest possible panel is 11 of the 12 justices, to prevent a deadlock. Eleven judges may sit on a panel: * in cases where the court is being asked to depart, or may decide to depart from a previous decision; * in cases of high constitutional importance or great public importance; * in cases where a conflict between decisions in theJapan
The Supreme Court of Japan, which has a total of fifteen justices, ordinarily hears cases in panels of five judges, but is required to hear cases en banc (by the "Grand Bench", 大法廷 ''daihōtei'') when ruling on most constitutional issues, when overturning a previous decision of the Supreme Court, when the five-judge panel is unable to reach a decision, and in other limited cases.Australia
Appeals to theFrance
In France, the Court of Cassation (France's highest judicial court) sometimes hears cases that represent very significant legal issues, as well as cases in which lower appeals courts have failed to apply its rulings as ordered, in a formation known as the ''Assemblée plénière'' (Plenary Session), but this does not include all the judges of the court (of which there can be up to 58). This consists of a nineteen-member panel composed of the Chief Justice of the Court of Cassation and three members from each of the Court's six divisions.See also
* Full courtReferences
External links
* * {{Wiktionary-inline, banco Civil procedure French legal terminology