Case Title: State Bank of India v. Ajay Kumar Sood
The Apex Court addressed the issue of extensive usage of legalese (technical legal words and phrases) in the judgments and laid down broad guidelines to write simple and lucid judgments.
Apparently, an incomprehensible judgment of the Himachal Pradesh High Court forced the Apex Court to address this issue without any delay. The Court observed that the purpose of a judgment is not to “confuse or confound the readers”.
The court further made the following observations -
“Judgments are primarily meant for those whose cases are decided by judges. Judgments of the High Courts and the Supreme Court also serve as precedents to guide future benches. A judgment must make sense to those whose lives and affairs are affected by the outcome of the case. While a judgment is read by those as well who have training in the law, they do not represent the entire universe of discourse. Confidence in the judicial process is predicated on the trust which its written word generates. If the meaning of the written word is lost in language, the ability of the adjudicator to retain the trust of the reader is severely eroded.”
It also emphasised on the fact that:-
The work of a judge cannot be reduced to a statistic about the disposal of a case,
A judgment is a manifestation of reason,
Judgment writing is a layered exercise,
Brevity is an unwitting victim of an overburdened judiciary,
Judges may have their own style of judgment writing but must ensure lucidity in writing.
The Court further referred to the IRAC Method Of Judgment Writing, it stated that:-
In terms of structuring judgments, it would be beneficial for courts to structure them in a manner such that the "Issue, Rule, Application and Conclusion" are easily identifiable. The well-renowned "IRAC" method generally followed for analyzing cases and structuring submissions can also benefit judgments when it is complemented by recording the facts and submissions.
The "Issue" refers to the question of law that the court is deciding. A court may be dealing with multiple issues in the same judgment. Identifying these issues clearly helps structure the judgment and provides clarity for the reader on the specific issue of law being decided in a particular segment of a judgment.
The "Rule" refers to the portion of the judgment which distils the submissions of counsel on the applicable law and doctrine for the issue identified.
This rule is applied to the facts of the case in which the issue has arisen. The analysis recording the reasoning of a court forms the "Application" section.
Finally, it is always useful for a court to summarize and lay out the "Conclusion" on the basis of its determination of the application of the rule to the issue along with the decision vis-à-vis the specific facts. This allows stakeholders, especially members of the bar as well as judges relying upon the case in the future, to concisely understand the holding of the case.