Reasoned Judgment

Reasoned Decision

There is a distinction between the judgement in the sense of the order and the reasoned judgement based on the findings of fact and the law which the judge may or may not write. The judgment is drawn up without setting out the reasoning or the evidence. The judgement in this sense is a concise finding and decision, usually embodying declarations and orders.

To an increasing extent, the High Court gives reasoned decisions. The European Convention on Human Rights Article 6 requires that reasons be given.

The courts hold that due process requires that a person winning or losing should understand why they have won or lost. This is especially so because, without reasons, the losing party will not understand whether the court has misdirected itself and whether there may be grounds for appeal available.

Nature of Obligation

The Human Rights cases indicate that the extent of the obligation varies with the nature of the decision and the circumstances of the case.

The court does not have to deal with every single issue raised by the parties and is not required to answer every single complaint or argument. Where representative complaints are considered sufficiently to dispose fairly of an action, it cannot be said the judgement is inadequate or unreasoned.

The obligation to give reasons focuses the mind of the judge on making a reasoned  decision based on the evidence in the case. It reduces the possibility of the judge relying on reasons not given in the judgement.

If insufficient reasons have been given, in particular for the purpose of an appeal or judicial review, the matter may be brought to the judge’s attention by formal application requesting additional reasons.

Extent of Reasons Required

The extent of the duty to give reasons depends on the nature of the case. Where there is a straightforward factual dispute involving which witness is to be believed, it is likely to be enough for the judge, perhaps after summarising the evidence, to indicate that he simply believes A’s version rather than B’s. Where the dispute involves argued points of law or inference from facts, the judge must consider the issues and explain why he prefers one case over the other.

It is perfectly reasonable and acceptable for a judge to give a short decision with brief reasons. It need not necessarily give a summary of the evidence. If there is a conflict of evidence the judge should deal with the conflict and make clear the findings of fact.

It need not analyse the evidence in detail. Its purpose is to address in whatever terms may be appropriate, the facts and issues in the case and the competing arguments on both sides. The degree of analysis or explanation is circumstances dependent.

In many cases judge will deliver a short “ex-tempore” oral judgement after the matter has concluded. This may be after a short period of reflection. A judge may make a decision and order, while deferring giving the reasons for the judgment.

Reserved Decisions

It is increasingly common in  High Court cases for judgements to be reserved so that  written judgement is to be delivered. The parties will be informed in advance of the date on which the judgment will be delivered.

Traditionally, the judgements were read out in court before the parties’ representatives. It is now more common for the judgement to be released to the parties and for the matter to be adjourned to deal with issues such as costs and other matters that may arise and require to be dealt with.

Because of delays in the issue of reserved judgements (whether or not written), the legislation provides for a register of reserved judgements in the Superior Courts as well as the District and Circuit civil courts. If the judgement is not delivered within two months of the date on which it is reserved, the President of the relevant court may list the proceedings before the judge concerned and give notice to the parties. The judge is to specify the date on or by which the judgement is to be given.

Particulars of judgements reserved are entered in books kept by the relevant court registrar.

Reasoned on Evidence

Every document which is intended for use in evidence ought to be formally marked by the registrar.  Only those documents which have been referred to at the trial, should be entered as read.  Where an order has been made for the defendant without evidence being heard, evidence which he could have put should be entered as read.

Judgments should set out a statement of evidence on which they are based. They should set out a statement of objections taken at the hearing, and the court’s decision on the objections, with the evidence, objected to being read or not read accordingly. Objections to admissibility should be dealt with at that time.

If the case is appealed, the appellant settles a schedule of the evidence used at the trial.  If there is a dispute as to what evidence shall be entered as read, the matter may be adjourned to the judge for decision. The judge may give directions as to the costs of adjournment and subject to such directions, the costs of setting the schedule. The costs are costs in the appeal.

The schedule is not limited to evidence in respect of a point under appeal. It ought to be a complete schedule of all evidence used at the trial.  It must be signed by the registrar.