Legal Definitions - commission of review

A commission of review was a historical legal mechanism in England, representing a special authorization granted in highly unusual or extraordinary circumstances. Its purpose was to allow for a re-examination of a judgment that had already been made by the Court of Delegates. The Court of Delegates primarily handled appeals from ecclesiastical courts (dealing with church law), as well as some cases related to admiralty (maritime law) and probate (wills and estates).

This commission was an exceptional measure, only invoked when a case was considered to be beyond the scope of ordinary appeals and required a unique, further review. However, the commission of review is no longer part of the English legal system. It became obsolete after 1832, when the Court of Delegates was abolished and its appellate functions were transferred to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.

Here are some hypothetical examples illustrating how a commission of review might have been used:

• Imagine it is the early 19th century, and a complex dispute arises over the inheritance of a large estate, involving a contested will. After extensive legal proceedings, the Court of Delegates issues a final judgment. However, one of the parties believes that the judgment contains a fundamental error of law or overlooks crucial evidence that was not properly considered. If the circumstances were deemed truly extraordinary and exceptional, they might have petitioned the Crown for a commission of review. If granted, this commission would have provided a rare, special opportunity for an additional panel to scrutinize the Delegates' decision, acknowledging the unique nature and potential injustice of the case.

• Consider a historical case involving the validity of a marriage performed by the Church of England, perhaps due to questions surrounding the consent of one party or a significant procedural irregularity. After the ecclesiastical courts and then the Court of Delegates had rendered their decisions, one of the parties might have felt the final ruling was profoundly unjust or based on a misinterpretation of religious law. If their situation was considered to be of such an extraordinary nature that it warranted a re-evaluation beyond the standard appellate process, they could have sought a commission of review to have the Delegates' judgment exceptionally re-examined.

• In the early 1800s, a clergyman might have faced serious accusations of misconduct, leading to a judgment by an ecclesiastical court that was subsequently appealed to the Court of Delegates. If the clergyman, or perhaps the church authorities, believed the Delegates' final decision contained a grave error, overlooked critical evidence, or had far-reaching implications for church doctrine, and the case was truly extraordinary in its nature, they might have petitioned for a commission of review. This would have been a rare, special authorization to scrutinize the Delegates' judgment once more, acknowledging the unique nature and potential impact of the case.