HOME

TheInfoList



OR:

In law, an ''en banc'' (; alternatively ''in banc'', ''in banco'' or ''in bank''; ) session is when all the
judge A judge is a person who wiktionary:preside, presides over court proceedings, either alone or as a part of a judicial panel. In an adversarial system, the judge hears all the witnesses and any other Evidence (law), evidence presented by the barris ...
s of a
court A court is an institution, often a government entity, with the authority to adjudicate legal disputes between Party (law), parties and Administration of justice, administer justice in Civil law (common law), civil, Criminal law, criminal, an ...
sit to hear a case, not just one judge or a smaller panel of judges. For courts like the United States Courts of Appeals in which each case is heard by a three-judge panel instead of the entire court, ''en banc'' review is usually used for only unusually complex or important cases or when the court believes there is an especially significant issue at stake. ''En banc'' is a French phrase meaning "in bench".


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 the
House of Lords The House of Lords is the upper house of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. Like the lower house, the House of Commons of the United Kingdom, House of Commons, it meets in the Palace of Westminster in London, England. One of the oldest ext ...
(as a court), Privy Council (as a court) and/or the Supreme Court has to be reconciled; or * in cases raising an important point in relation to the
European Convention on Human Rights The European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR; formally the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms) is a Supranational law, supranational convention to protect human rights and political freedoms in Europe. Draf ...
. , only two cases have been heard by the maximum panel of 11 justices, both arising out of political events relating to Brexit: '' R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union'' ("Miller I"), which was heard by all 11 serving justices (there was one judicial vacancy at the time) and decided by an 8–3 majority, and '' R (Miller) v The Prime Minister and Cherry v Advocate General for Scotland'' ("Miller II"), which was heard by 11 of the 12 serving justices (Lord Briggs did not sit) and decided unanimously.


Japan

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 the
High Court of Australia The High Court of Australia is the apex court of the Australian legal system. It exercises original and appellate jurisdiction on matters specified in the Constitution of Australia and supplementary legislation. The High Court was establi ...
(the federal supreme court of Australia) are sometimes heard by the full bench of all seven justices. Cases that are heard by the full bench include cases of constitutional significance, or where the court is being asked to overrule a previous decision, or cases that involve principles of major public importance. The state supreme courts and the
Federal Court of Australia The Federal Court of Australia is an Australian superior court which has jurisdiction to deal with most civil disputes governed by federal law (with the exception of family law matters), along with some summary (less serious) and indictable (mo ...
often hear appeals by a " full court" of judges, but this does not normally include all the judges on the court. For example, in
New South Wales New South Wales (commonly abbreviated as NSW) is a States and territories of Australia, state on the Eastern states of Australia, east coast of :Australia. It borders Queensland to the north, Victoria (state), Victoria to the south, and South ...
, particularly important appeal cases are heard by five judges, chosen from a pool of more than a dozen appeal judges. Some court buildings in Australia include a courtroom specifically called the "banco court", which is a large courtroom where the judges of the court can sit ''en banc'' - with ''in banco'', the Medieval Latin term, being preferred in Australia over the Norman French equivalent ''en banc''. They are used for full bench hearings, as well as ceremonies.


France

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 court


References


External links

* * {{Wiktionary-inline, banco Civil procedure French legal terminology