224.—(1) Rules made under section 89 may fix the number of judges of the Court of Appeal who may sit for any purpose; but, subject to subsection (2)—
(a)an uneven number shall sit, which for the purposes of any final determination by the Court other than the summary dismissal of an appeal, shall not be fewer than three; and
(b)any determination by the Court on any matter (whether final or otherwise) shall, where more than one judge sits, be according to the opinion of a majority of the judges who sit for the purpose of determining that matter.
(2) If, in a circumstance referred to in section 86(6), it is not practicable for the Governor to make any appointment under section 90(3), two judges of the Court of Appeal may hear, or continue to hear, and may determine, an appeal that has been set down for hearing; but—
(a)if those judges are not in agreement about the determination of any matter arising in the course of the proceedings, the presiding judge shall decide; and
(b)if those judges are not in agreement as to whether the appeal should be allowed, the presiding judge shall discontinue the appeal, and the matter shall be required to be reheard before the Court of Appeal consisting of three or a greater uneven number of judges of the Court.
(3) Subject to subsections (1) and (2), rules made under section 89 may provide for a reference from a decision of a single judge to the Court of Appeal.
(4) Subject to subsection (5), the Court of Appeal may sit in Tristan da Cunha or outside Tristan da Cunha.
(5) The Court of Appeal may sit outside Tristan da Cunha, if satisfied that—
(a)every party to the proceeding is able to participate, in person or through a legal representative, by teleconference or other means of electronic, oral or written communication;
(b)no injustice will result; and
(c)the course proposed is in the public interest.