What might a judge seek during a 'de novo' review?

During a 'de novo' review, a judge seeks to examine the case afresh, looking at the issues presented without relying on the conclusions or interpretations of the lower court. This process allows the judge to evaluate the evidence and arguments presented by both parties as if the case were being heard for the first time. Therefore, new arguments and additional perspectives from both sides become instrumental in determining the outcome of the appeal.

This type of review is particularly pertinent in situations where the appeal involves matters of law and fact that need to be reassessed or if there are significant issues that were not adequately explored previously. The opportunity for both parties to present their arguments anew is central to the concept of a de novo review, allowing the judge to arrive at a decision based on a full understanding of the circumstances rather than being constrained by prior judgments.

In contrast, seeking clarification on existing laws or affirming the original ruling would not align with the intent of a de novo review, which emphasizes reevaluation rather than simply upholding or interpreting existing decisions. Curtailing appeal rights moves against the foundational principles of judicial review, which are meant to ensure fairness and thoroughness in the legal process.