Nearly all legal systems have an appeal process that allows litigants disappointed with the decision of a first instance court (trial court) to seek reconsideration before a higher court (the appeal court). Various rationales have been offered to explain why the appeal process is such a widely observed feature of adjudication, what its underlying objectives are, and what effects it produces on litigants and judges.
From a general standpoint, the possibility given to disappointed litigants to obtain review of a trial court judgment (either on the merits of the case or for pure issues of law) increases the overall quality of the judicial outcome. This is obvious ex post: a second stage review allows to correct errors that might have occurred in the first judgment and, therefore, eventually ensures better and more accurate decisions. But it may also be true ex ante: if the threat of bringing an appeal is credible and the risk of being reversed matters for the first-instance judge, she will put more effort on deciding cases and the quality of her judgments will be higher.
Moreover, the analysis of the rules applicable to the appeal process, the rate at which appeals are brought, their time length and outcome are crucial elements for assessing the overall efficiency of adjudication in a given country. If demand for appeal is not driven by strategic behavior of litigants (ie: appeals are brought for really perceived errors made by the lower court's decision rather than for matters of convenience - such as, for instance, delaying its enforcement), high rates of appeal and high reversal rates may be indirect measures of the quality of lower courts decisions. Furthermore, if appeals are frequent, their time-length will significantly influence the overall time period that litigants face in order to obtain a final judgment (res iudicata).
Italian civil procedure rules on appeals (and trials) have been thoroughly changed from early Nineties, when different and subsequent reforms were introduced. This paper analyzes the effects of this intensive change in legislation on three different measures -- rates of appeal, reversal rates and time-lengths -- that may be useful to assess the overall efficiency of judicial auditing in Italy. Data focus on ordinary civil proceedings brought in appeal: dismissal cases (which have a fast-track procedure), and other special proceedings (such as injunctions, summary proceedings or interim orders) are not dealt with.
