CRITICAL THINING READING AND WRITING - 12

Legal New Writing

Diya Halder
21212020

News: SC shuns complex Language for Judgements

A ruling, the Supreme Court has ruled, "must not fool the reader with the veneer of technical
language since it speaks to the present and to the future" in resolving critical legal issues, in
addition to offering a forum for society discourse. A bench led by Justice Dhananjay Y
Chandrachud established criteria for judicial writing, emphasising that each judgement is a
brick in the consolidation of the fundamental principles on which a legal order is based.
According to the report, "judgement writing is thus a vital weapon in supporting the rule of law
and restraining rule by the law." While judges may have their own manner of writing
judgments, the bench, which comprised Justice AS Bopanna, stated that lucidity in writing
must be maintained across these styles.

The judge must write in such a way that the questions of law and fact that arise for decision are
easily understood... While a judgement is read by persons with legal knowledge, it does not
represent the entire universe of debate, according to the bench. «If the meaning of the written
word is lost in translation, the adjudicator's ability to retain the reader's trust is severely
eroded... Whether or not the writer of a judgement intends it, the written product exists for the
future, representing another incremental step in societal dialogue, » the bench stated. The court
stated that a judgement displaying a maze of incomprehensible language defeats the purpose
of judicial writing, adding that a judgement must make sense to those whose lives and affairs
are affected by the outcome of the case, in addition to reflecting a commitment to protecting
legal principles and imparting certainty to the law. «Writing a judgement is a multi-layered
exercise.

A ruling answers the concerns and arguments of forensic contestants in one layer. A ruling
addresses stakeholder beyond the conflict in another layer. The court emphasised the
importance of judicial writing after encountering an "incomprehensible" decision from the
Himachal Pradesh high court regarding disciplinary proceedings against a bank employee. «It
is also important to note that a judgement speaks to both the present and the future.
The court was emphatic that, while a judge's recesses and expressions of mind may be
incomprehensible, "the reasoning in judgement cannot be." At one point in the decision, the
bench stated that all judicial institutions must ensure that the judgments and orders they publish
do not contain improperly placed watermarks, which render the documents inaccessible to
people with visual disabilities who use screen readers to access them.