Why would a case be escalated to a 'de novo' review?

A 'de novo' review refers to a legal standard where a case is evaluated from the beginning, without considering previous rulings or conclusions. This type of review seeks to provide a fresh and independent assessment of the facts and circumstances surrounding the case.

In this context, option B is correct because it emphasizes that the purpose of a 'de novo' review is to reassess the information as if the case has not been previously decided. This allows for new interpretations and the possibility of reaching different conclusions based on the evidence presented.

The other options do not align with the primary purpose of a 'de novo' review. Option A suggests merely reaffirming the initial decision, which contradicts the essence of a 'de novo' approach since it seeks to reassess rather than confirm prior findings. Option C implies a preparatory function for a jury trial, which is not the focus of a 'de novo' review; rather, it is concentrated on the judge's analysis of the facts themselves. Option D mentions applying newer laws retrospectively, which does not pertain to how a case is reviewed but touches on issues of legal timing and application of laws rather than the review standard itself.