The issue of introducing new claims before the Court of Appeal, particularly with respect to their subject-matter and cause of action, remains uncertain and has generated considerable controversy. This is largely due to the absence of clear legislative provisions regulating such matters. Article 190 of the Jordanian Civil Procedure Code merely stipulates that, in the absence of specific provisions concerning appeals, the rules applicable before the Court of First Instance shall apply. However, this reference is insufficient to empower the Court of Appeal to exercise its jurisdiction effectively in disputes concerning the admissibility of new claims related to their subject-matter and cause of action. Permitting new claims regarding subject-matter and cause of action would enable litigants to secure a more comprehensive resolution of the dispute, thereby avoiding the additional costs associated with initiating fresh proceedings. The pursuit of justice should prevail over rigid procedural restrictions derived from the principle of two-degree litigation and the immutability of the dispute. Claims cannot be regarded as entirely new where they are connected to the original application, since a change in the cause of action does not necessarily undermine the stability of the dispute, provided the remaining elements of the case remain intact. Consequently, this position supports the acceptance of new claims in terms of both subject-matter and cause of action, contrary to the approach of the Jordanian legislator. An appeal effectively reopens the dispute before the Court of Appeal. The limits imposed on this process should therefore be moderated by allowing new claims related to subject-matter and cause of action, provided such claims are essential for resolving the appeal and are introduced under conditions that safeguard the principle of two-degree litigation without causing prejudice to the parties’ rights.