Small claims appeal

Losing a small claims case does not give you an automatic right to have it looked at again — an appeal needs permission, a narrow legal ground, and is a check on the original decision, not a second attempt at the same argument.

Can I appeal a small claims decision just because I disagree with it?

No. Disagreeing with the outcome is not a ground of appeal on its own. Under CPR 52.21(3), an appeal can only succeed where the decision was wrong — wrong on the law, wrong on the facts, or wrong in how the judge exercised their discretion — or unjust because of a serious procedural irregularity. A judge is entitled to prefer one side's evidence over the other, and that preference is not, by itself, an error capable of being appealed.

Do I need permission to appeal a small claims track decision?

Yes. There is no automatic right of appeal from the small claims track. Permission can be asked for from the judge who made the decision, usually at the end of the hearing, or from the appeal court itself if the trial judge refuses or it was not asked for at the time. Permission is only granted where the appeal has a real prospect of success or there is some other compelling reason for it to be heard.

What form do I use and what does it cost?

Appeals from a decision made on the small claims track use Form N164, Appellant's Notice (Small Claims Track only) — not Form N161, which is used for fast track, multi-track and other appeals. As of the EX50 fee schedule current in 2026, the court fee for an appellant's notice on the small claims track is £151, compared with £175 for other County Court appeals. Check the fee actually charged on gov.uk before filing, since it is reviewed periodically.

How long do I have to appeal?

Normally 21 days from the date of the decision, under CPR 52.12(2), unless the judge who made the decision directs a different period at the hearing. This deadline is not automatically extended just because you were given time to think about whether to appeal, or because you asked the trial judge for permission and were waiting for a written reason to be produced. If you need more time, you have to apply for it before the 21 days run out.

If I lose the appeal, will I have to pay the other side's legal costs?

Generally not, for a first appeal. The small claims track's no-costs rule in CPR 27.14 continues to apply to an appeal from a District Judge to a Circuit Judge in the County Court, subject to the same narrow exceptions that apply at trial — for example where a party has behaved unreasonably, or the cost of an approved transcript. This is not automatic, however, and the position is different again if a case goes further, to a second appeal in the Court of Appeal, where ordinary costs-shifting rules generally apply.

Can I introduce new evidence at the appeal that I did not use at the hearing?

Only in limited circumstances. An appeal under CPR 52.21(1) is a review of the decision the judge actually made, not a rehearing of the whole case, and the appeal court will not normally consider evidence that was not before the lower court. If you have evidence you genuinely could not have obtained or produced at the original hearing, you would need to apply for permission to rely on it, and the court applies a recognised, and fairly strict, test before allowing that.

Why there is no automatic right to appeal

The small claims track is designed to give a quick, low-cost, relatively informal decision, usually from a District Judge, on disputes that are often for modest sums of money. If every losing party could simply have the case re-heard by asking, that design would collapse — appeals would become a routine second attempt at the same argument, adding cost and delay to a process built to avoid both.

Because of that, permission to appeal is required before an appeal can proceed at all. Permission can be sought from the judge who decided the case, typically raised at the end of the hearing itself, or from the appeal court if it was not asked for then, or was refused. The test for permission, under CPR 52.3, is whether the proposed appeal would have a real prospect of success, or whether there is some other compelling reason for it to be heard — for example, because the case raises a point of principle that ought to be considered. Simply feeling that the judge got it wrong, without more, does not meet that test.

The two grounds of appeal, and what they do not cover

CPR 52.21(3) sets out the only two grounds on which an appeal court will interfere with a decision from the lower court: that the decision was

unjust because of a serious procedural or other irregularity

in the proceedings below.

What neither ground covers is a judge preferring one witness's account over another's, or reaching a conclusion on the facts that was open to them on the evidence, even if a different judge might have reached a different conclusion. An appeal court gives considerable weight to the trial judge's assessment of the evidence and the witnesses, because the trial judge saw and heard them directly and the appeal court did not.

A review, not a rehearing

CPR 52.21(1) states plainly that every appeal is limited to a review of the decision of the lower court, unless a rule or practice direction provides otherwise, or the court considers that in the circumstances of an individual appeal it would be in the interests of justice to hold a rehearing. In practice, small claims appeals are reviews.

This matters practically in two ways. First, the appeal court is looking at whether the original decision was flawed in the ways described above, not deciding the case afresh from scratch. Second, and directly connected, the appeal court will not normally admit evidence that was not before the original judge. If a document, a witness, or an argument could have been put before the small claims judge at the hearing and was not, the appeal is generally not the place to introduce it — the appeal court applies a recognised, and fairly demanding, test before allowing fresh evidence, and simply having forgotten something or having found better evidence afterwards does not usually satisfy it.

Where the appeal goes, the form, and the deadline

Costs: does the small claims 'no costs' protection survive an appeal?

One of the defining features of the small claims track is that the losing party generally does not have to pay the winning party's legal costs, under CPR 27.14. A genuinely important, and often misunderstood, question is whether that protection disappears once a case moves to an appeal.

For a first appeal from a District Judge to a Circuit Judge in the County Court, the no-costs regime in CPR 27.14 generally continues to apply. The rule itself contemplates appeals directly — for example, it allows the cost of an approved transcript reasonably incurred for an appeal to be recovered, which would be unnecessary wording if appeals fell outside the rule altogether. The narrow exceptions that apply at trial continue to apply on appeal too, most significantly costs arising from a party's unreasonable behaviour, which the court can assess and award summarily. What this means in practice is that bringing, or defending, a first small claims appeal does not usually expose you to the other side's solicitor's fees simply because you lose — but it is not a costs-free environment either, and behaving unreasonably in how the appeal is conducted can change that.

This changes if a case goes further still, to a second appeal to the Court of Appeal. Second appeals of this kind sit outside the small claims costs protection and are generally subject to ordinary costs-shifting rules, meaning a losing party can be at much greater financial risk than at the small claims stage or the first appeal. Very few small claims cases go this far, but anyone contemplating it should understand that the costs position is materially different from the track they started on.

A claimant is awarded nothing in a £3,000 small claims dispute about the quality of work carried out by a builder. The judge accepts the builder's evidence that the work met an acceptable standard and prefers it to the claimant's evidence and photographs. The claimant is unhappy with the result and considers appealing.

Appeal fee (N164, 2026)

If the claimant's real complaint is that they simply do not accept the judge's assessment of the builder's evidence — a straightforward disagreement with who was believed — that is not, on its own, a ground of appeal under CPR 52.21(3), and permission would be unlikely to be granted on that basis alone.

The position is different if the claimant can point to something more specific: for example, that the judge applied the wrong legal test for the standard of workmanship expected under the contract, or refused to look at a key piece of documentary evidence that had been properly disclosed and was directly relevant, without giving a reason. Those are arguments capable of meeting the "wrong" or "serious procedural irregularity" tests. Even then, the claimant would still need to satisfy the permission stage — a real prospect of success, not just an arguable point — and should weigh the £151 fee, the time involved and the underlying claim value of £3,000 against how strong that specific argument actually is, rather than against how unhappy they are with losing.

Overriding objective

Civil Procedure Rules, Part 52

Civil Procedure Rules, Part 27

Practice Direction 52B — appeals in the county courts and the High Court

Appeal a civil court decision

EX50 — civil and family court fees

Small Claims Appeal — Small Claims Glossary

Whether you can appeal a small claims track decision, the narrow grounds that apply, the N164 form, the 21-day deadline, and how costs protection works on appeal.