The appeal court knocked back the argument that the Grand Court did not have the legal authority to try absent defendants. But both arguments failed and the higher court dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction. But the appeal court noted that this is because there are specific issues relating to trials in the lower court that have to be dealt with that don’t apply to the Grand Court. The appeal court said there was “no basis for inferring that the legislature has decided to distinguish summary trials and judge-alone trials on the one hand, and jury trials on the other”. In this case, Manderson had gone on the run after he was charged and knew a trial was set.