An interlocutory appeal is a challenge brought to a higher court against a ruling issued during ongoing proceedings, rather than waiting for the final judgment that normally triggers appellate review. The term derives from the Latin interloqui ("to speak between") and reflects the exceptional nature of the procedure: most legal systems follow a "final judgment rule" to prevent piecemeal litigation, so interlocutory appeals are permitted only in narrowly defined circumstances.
In U.S. federal practice, the main vehicles are 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a), which allows immediate appeal of certain injunction orders, and § 1292(b), which permits a district judge to certify a controlling question of law for discretionary review by the court of appeals. The collateral order doctrine, articulated by the Supreme Court in Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp. (1949), further allows appeal of rulings that conclusively determine a disputed question separate from the merits and would be effectively unreviewable later.
International tribunals use analogous mechanisms. The ICTY and ICTR Rules of Procedure and Evidence allowed interlocutory appeals on jurisdiction and certified issues; the landmark Prosecutor v. Tadić jurisdiction decision (1995) was itself an interlocutory appeal that established the Tribunal's authority. The International Criminal Court, under Article 82 of the Rome Statute, permits interlocutory appeals on jurisdiction, admissibility, release decisions, and other certified questions. The ICJ does not use this terminology but addresses preliminary objections under Article 79 of its Rules.
Typical grounds include disputes over:
- Jurisdiction of the court or tribunal
- Provisional measures or injunctions
- Pre-trial detention and bail rulings
- Immunity claims by states or officials
- Class certification in collective actions
For MUN delegates and IR researchers, interlocutory appeals matter because they often produce the legal reasoning that shapes a tribunal's substantive doctrine long before any final verdict.
Example
In October 1995, the ICTY Appeals Chamber issued its interlocutory decision in Prosecutor v. Tadić, upholding the Tribunal's jurisdiction and defining the scope of international humanitarian law in non-international armed conflicts.
Frequently asked questions
A regular appeal challenges a final judgment that resolves the entire case, while an interlocutory appeal targets a specific ruling issued while proceedings are still ongoing.
Keep learning