Editing Judgment (law) (section)

==== Canada (excluding [[Quebec]]) ====

The [[Supreme Court of Canada]] has recognized a common law duty to provide "adequate" reasons for judgment and has stated that "the giving of reasoned judgments is central to the legitimacy of judicial institutions in the eyes of the public."<ref>''R. v. Sheppard'', 2002 S.C.C. 26 at para. 5, [2002] 1 S.C.R. 869.</ref> Determining whether reasons for judgment are adequate is a contextual exercise that may call for different information or depth of reasoning based on the circumstances of the case.<ref>''R. v. Sheppard'', 2002 S.C.C. 26 at para. 19, [2002] 1 S.C.R. 869.</ref> In general, Canadian courts are expected to provide reasons for judgment as a duty to the public at large,<ref>''R. v. Sheppard'', 2002 S.C.C. 26 at para. 22, [2002] 1 S.C.R. 869.</ref> to demonstrate that the judge or judges have engaged with the parties' pleadings,<ref>''R. v. Sheppard'', 2002 S.C.C. 26 at para. 23, [2002] 1 S.C.R. 869.</ref> to explain why the parties won or lost,<ref>''R. v. Sheppard'', 2002 S.C.C. 26 at para. 24, [2002] 1 S.C.R. 869.</ref> and to allow for meaningful appellate review (in the event that the case may be appealed).<ref>''R. v. Sheppard'', 2002 S.C.C. 26 at para. 25, [2002] 1 S.C.R. 869.</ref>

With the above guiding principles in mind, Canadian courts must "read [the reasons] as a whole, in the context of the evidence, the arguments and the trial, with an appreciation of the purposes or functions for which they are delivered..." to determine whether the reasons for judgment are adequate.<ref>''R. v. R.E.M.'', 2008 S.C.C. 51 at para. 16, [2008] 3 S.C.R. 3.</ref> The reasons must tell the reader why the judgment was made, but do not need to tell the reader how the judge made the decision rendered in the judgment.<ref>''R. v. R.E.M.'', 2008 S.C.C. 51 at para. 17, [2008] 3 S.C.R. 3.</ref>

Provincial rules of civil procedure provide further guidance relating to specific types of judgments. For example:

* ''Declaratory judgment'': a declaratory judgment can be made by the court regardless of whether a remedy is being claimed.<ref>''Queen’s Bench Act'', R.S.S. 1998, ch. Q-1.01, § 11(b)(iii) (Can.).</ref>
* ''Default judgment'': a default judgment can be sought by the plaintiff where a defendant “has been noted in default” for certain claims.<ref>''Courts of Justice Act'', R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 194, § 19.04 (Can.).</ref>
* ''Summary judgment'': a summary judgment may be available if “there is no genuine issue requiring a trial with respect to a claim or defence”  or if “the parties agree to have all or part of the claim determined by a summary judgment and the court is satisfied that it is appropriate to grant summary judgment.”<ref>''Courts of Justice Act'', R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 194, § 20.04(2)(b) (Can.).</ref>