Judgment (law)

In law, a judgment is a decision of a court regarding the rights and liabilities of parties in a legal action or proceeding.

British, Australian, New Zealand, American, and Canadian English generally use judgment when referring to a court's formal ruling.

[14] Written reasons for judgment are not generally provided immediately following the hearing and may take days, weeks, or even months to be released.

In common law legal systems, judgment enforcement is regulated by administrative divisions such as a province, territory, or federated state, while in civil law legal systems judgment enforcement is regulated through the national Code of Civil Procedure.

Specific references to the judgment enforcement rules of Germany, Canada (Saskatchewan), and the United States (California) are made in this section.

[36][37] Different enforcement mechanisms exist, including seizure and sale of the judgment debtor's property or garnishment.

[43] This document has the effect of formally closing the case[44] and terminating any ongoing garnishment arrangements or liens.

[51] In general, Canadian courts are expected to provide reasons for judgment as a duty to the public at large,[52] to demonstrate that the judge or judges have engaged with the parties' pleadings,[53] to explain why the parties won or lost,[54] and to allow for meaningful appellate review (in the event that the case may be appealed).

[57] Provincial rules of civil procedure provide further guidance relating to specific types of judgments.

For example: In Mak Kang Hoi v Ho Yuk Wah David, the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal stated that 'litigants are entitled to have their cases decided with reasonable promptitude'.

The Court considered that the 'extraordinary' and 'inordinate' delay of 30 months which the trial judge (Madam Recorder Gladys Li SC) took in handing down her reserved judgment was 'wholly excessive' and 'extremely regrettable', and recognised that 'it may lead to a denial of justice as a Judge's memory of the evidence, the witnesses, the submissions and the trial itself may fade with time', but nonetheless upheld her decision as it was 'objectively sound'.

[63][64][65] The Court of Appeal has on occasion delivered its reasons for judgment a significant period of time after the hearing.

For example, in China Medical Technologies v Samson Tsang Tak Yung, the reasons for judgment, as well as the reserved decision as to costs, were delivered by Mr Justice Barma, JA after a delay of 34 months.

For example, in Leung Chi Wang v Leung Yui Shing (decided by Deputy District Judge Richard Leung),[67] Kan Yay Shan v Mo You Mut (decided by Deputy District Judge Simon Lui),[68] Golden Field Glass Works v Yeung Chun Keung (decided by Deputy District Judge Timon Shum),[69] and Han Mei Fang v All Occupiers of Flat F, 6th Floor, Kapok Mansion (decided by Deputy District Judge Samson Hung),[70] judgment was handed down between 31 and 33 months after the trial.

The Court of Appeal held that the trial judge failed to give adequate reasons for his decision and stated that 'the failure to deal with [one of the critical issues was] probably attributable to the delay in the preparation of the judgment'.

An unduly lengthy set of Reasons also creates problems for the judge himself in focussing on the essential issues at trial so as to explain, clearly, concisely and expediently, why he came to the decision he did'.

7 months later, the Judge handed down the written reasons for judgment dismissing the appeal, a result which was inconsistent with the oral decision announced at the end of the hearing.

As of 2017, the Supreme Court 'will endeavour to deliver judgment in an appeal within six months from the last day of the hearing'.

Furthermore, providing reasons for judgment serves a practical purpose insofar as it necessarily requires the court to engage in thoughtful consideration of the cases presented.

Otherwise, there is a real risk of a complete or partial rehearing being ordered, which would bring the administration of law into disrepute.

[101] In light of compliance with the rules of the Code and the absence of an appeal, a judgment is presumed to have been executed correctly.

[103] Modern French judgments generally include "[a] recounting [of] the facts, the procedure and the claims of the parties, as a narrative ...

[106] Parties to the proceedings are entitled to receive "a certified copy of the judgement imprinted with an order of enforcement.

[116] Specifically, the legislation requires that "the claims asserted and the means of challenge or defence [be] brought before the court, highlighting the petitions filed.

[123] The Code states that a final judgment must be made "when the suit is ripe for making a judicial decision.

"[124] The judgment must contain the names of the parties, the court, the final date of oral argument, the facts, and the reasons for decision[125] subject to some exceptions.

[129] Judgments must be pronounced in a public hearing[130] and must "include the grounds on which they were based and the legal authority thereof.