← Back to blog

Structure of the Courts for SQE1

Part of our SQE1 Legal System guide → View the full SQE1 Legal System guide

01 May 2026

Master the court hierarchy and appeal routes—essential for SQE1 procedural questions across both FLK1 and FLK2.

Structure of the Courts for SQE1

The Legal System > Structure of the Courts

Understanding the structure of the courts is one of the first building blocks of English law—and a topic the SQE1 examiners love to test. If you cannot identify which court hears a particular case or where an appeal lies, you will struggle with procedural questions across both FLK1 and FLK2.

What Is the Structure of the Courts?

Many SQE1 candidates lose marks by confusing appeal routes from the Magistrates' Court (Crown Court) with appeal routes from the Crown Court (Court of Appeal)—a distinction examiners test repeatedly. England and Wales operate a hierarchical court system. Each court has a defined jurisdiction—the types of cases it can hear—and decisions flow upward on appeal. The hierarchy exists to ensure consistency, allow errors to be corrected, and give higher courts the authority to set binding precedent.

At the lowest level sit the Magistrates' Court (criminal) and the County Court (civil). Above them are the Crown Court, the High Court with its three divisions, the Court of Appeal, and the Supreme Court at the apex. The Privy Council also sits outside the main hierarchy for certain Commonwealth and specialist appeals.

Key Principles for SQE1

  • Magistrates' Court: handles summary offences and either-way offences where mode of trial is summary; also deals with some civil matters such as family proceedings and licensing.

  • Crown Court: tries indictable-only offences and either-way offences sent for trial; also hears appeals from the Magistrates' Court.

  • County Court: general civil jurisdiction for contract, tort, land, and equity claims; multi-track cases over £100,000 may transfer to the High Court.

  • High Court: three divisions—Queen's Bench (contract, tort, judicial review), Chancery (trusts, land, company, IP), and Family.

  • Court of Appeal: Criminal Division hears appeals from the Crown Court; Civil Division hears appeals from the County Court and High Court. The rules governing which decisions are binding on the Court of Appeal are explained in precedent in English law.

  • Supreme Court: final appellate court for the United Kingdom; hears appeals on points of law of general public importance. The court hierarchy itself is fundamental to understanding civil vs criminal court systems.

How This Appears in SQE1 Questions

Examiners test this distinction repeatedly, embedding court structure questions throughout procedural scenarios. Questions on court structure typically present a scenario and ask you to identify the correct court or the correct appeal route. The examiners test whether you can distinguish between first-instance jurisdiction and appellate jurisdiction. A common trap is confusing the route of appeal from the Magistrates' Court (which goes to the Crown Court for rehearing, or to the High Court by way of case stated) with the route from the Crown Court (which goes to the Court of Appeal Criminal Division).

You should also watch for questions that blur the line between the County Court and the High Court—particularly around financial thresholds and the allocation of civil claims to different tracks.

Quick Example Scenario

David is convicted of theft (an either-way offence) in the Magistrates' Court and wishes to appeal against his conviction. To which court should David appeal?

The key legal issue is the appeal route from the Magistrates' Court for a conviction. David should appeal to the Crown Court, where the case will be reheard by a judge. If he wished to appeal on a point of law alone, he could appeal to the High Court by way of case stated. The Court of Appeal Criminal Division would not hear a direct appeal from the Magistrates' Court.

Common Mistakes Students Make

  • Confusing the appeal route from the Magistrates' Court (Crown Court) with the appeal route from the Crown Court (Court of Appeal).
  • Forgetting that the High Court has both first-instance and appellate jurisdiction.
  • Mixing up the three divisions of the High Court and the types of cases each handles.
  • Overlooking the distinction between 'appeal by way of case stated' (point of law only) and a full rehearing.

Quick Summary

  • Magistrates' Court: handles summary and either-way offences at summary trial; also civil jurisdiction in family and licensing matters
  • Crown Court: tries indictable-only and either-way offences sent for trial; hears appeals from Magistrates' Court (rehearing or case stated on point of law)
  • County Court: general civil jurisdiction for contract, tort, land, equity claims; cases over £100,000 may transfer to High Court; multi-track allocation above certain value thresholds
  • High Court: three divisions - Queen's Bench (contract, tort, judicial review), Chancery (trusts, land, company, IP), Family; has both first-instance and appellate jurisdiction
  • Court of Appeal: Criminal Division hears appeals from Crown Court; Civil Division hears appeals from County Court and High Court
  • Supreme Court: final appellate court for UK; hears appeals on points of law of general public importance
  • Appeal routes: from Magistrates' Court to Crown Court (rehearing) or High Court (case stated on point of law); from Crown Court to Court of Appeal (Criminal Division); from County Court/High Court to Court of Appeal (Civil Division); to Supreme Court on point of law of general public importance

Exam tip

Watch for confusion between the appeal route from the Magistrates' Court (Crown Court) and from the Crown Court (Court of Appeal). These are tested frequently and are a common source of lost marks.

Want to test this now? Try a few SQE1-style questions below before moving on.

Test Yourself

Test yourself

Quick check questions based on this article.

Question 1

Scenario

A solicitor is advising a client on a small claims matter in the County Court. The claim relates to a defective product and is valued at £3,500. The solicitor has explained to the client that the small claims track is designed for lower-value claims and has simplified procedures. The client asks whether the case could be transferred to the High Court because the client believes the High Court is a 'better' court that will take the claim more seriously. The client has also asked whether a barrister is needed for the hearing. The solicitor explains that the small claims track is designed to be accessible to litigants in person. The client's friend has told the client that having a solicitor attend the small claims hearing will guarantee a costs award if the client wins. The solicitor recalls that costs recovery on the small claims track is restricted. The solicitor has also identified that the case raises a novel legal point about product liability that has not been considered by any court. The client asks whether this means the case should be heard in a higher court. The solicitor is mindful of the duty to provide competent advice and not to raise unrealistic expectations about the likely venue or outcome.

Which of the following correctly describes the position regarding the venue for this claim?

Question 2

Scenario

A solicitor is advising a client on the prospects of an appeal to the Supreme Court. The client's case was heard in the Court of Appeal (Civil Division), which dismissed the appeal. The solicitor has identified that the case raises a point of law of general public importance concerning the interpretation of a statutory provision. The solicitor has explained that permission to appeal to the Supreme Court is required. The client asks who grants permission to appeal. The solicitor recalls that permission may be sought from the Court of Appeal or from the Supreme Court itself. The client has been told by a colleague that if the Court of Appeal refuses permission, there is no further avenue to seek permission. The solicitor does not believe this is correct. The client has also asked about the timeframe for seeking permission and whether costs will be recoverable if the appeal is successful. The solicitor is mindful of the obligation to give honest and realistic advice about the prospects of success. The case involves a significant sum of money, and the client is eager to pursue every avenue. The solicitor has assessed that while the case raises an important legal point, the prospects of the Supreme Court granting permission are uncertain. The solicitor considers whether the duty to act in the client's best interests requires her to recommend pursuing the appeal or whether the duty to provide competent and honest advice requires her to be candid about the risks.

Which of the following correctly describes the procedure for seeking permission to appeal to the Supreme Court after the Court of Appeal has refused permission?

Question 3

Scenario

A solicitor is advising on whether the Court of Appeal may overrule one of its own previous decisions using the per incuriam exception. The earlier Court of Appeal decision was delivered in 2015 and held that a particular statutory provision did not apply to commercial leases. The solicitor has discovered that the 2015 panel did not consider a directly relevant House of Lords decision from 1998 that had interpreted the statutory provision as applying to all types of lease. The House of Lords decision was not cited in argument and was not mentioned in the 2015 judgment. The solicitor considers whether the failure to consider the 1998 House of Lords authority renders the 2015 Court of Appeal decision per incuriam. The opponent argues that per incuriam applies only where the court failed to consider a statute, not where it failed to consider a previous judicial decision. The solicitor disagrees and researches the scope of the doctrine. The solicitor's client recently moved to a new flat, which is unrelated to the legal proceedings. The solicitor notes that the 1998 House of Lords decision was binding on the Court of Appeal at the time of the 2015 decision. The solicitor considers whether the omission was material - that is, whether consideration of the authority would have affected the outcome. The solicitor concludes that consideration of the 1998 decision would almost certainly have led to a different result. The solicitor also considers whether the per incuriam exception is narrowly construed. The solicitor prepares submissions on the applicability of the exception.

Is the 2015 Court of Appeal decision likely to be treated as having been decided per incuriam?

Practice with full exam-style questions

Try DemoView Pricing

Related Topics

Practise Structure Of The Courts Questions for SQE1

Want to solidify your knowledge? ActusPrep provides realistic SQE1 questions tailored to this topic.

👉 Try our free demo: https://actusprep.com/demo 👉 View plans and pricing: https://actusprep.com/pricing