Wording of court decisions IATJ Lucerne, 4 September 2015 General discussion

Issue 1: Function and structure of court decision Should the decision be self-sufficient (or leave space for opinion by advocate general or summary) ? Should the decision be a sober legal statement or should it provide a comprehensive discussion of issues ?

Issue 1 Should the decision follow a straight line between a starting point (e.g. applicable Law) and the outcome of the case ? Should separate blocks (e.g. facts/law) be used, or should facts and law be blended as necessary for the logic of the decision ?

Issue 2: How deep into the details? Is there a duty to describe the whole judicial procedure ? How far should facts be described: –Extensively ? –Only when material to the outcome of the case or when hotly disputed by parties ?

Issue 2 How extensively should the reasons of law be explained: –answer to every sub-argument or not ? – justification of the interpretation given to the law ? – mention of precedents, with or without discussion about their meaning or scope ? Should the outcome of the case be stated clearly but concisely or should the decision provide guidance about its future implementation ?

Issue 3: Style Should the style be standardized, detached and dry, or more personal ? Should we use ordinary words as much as possible and how far should we use other languages (Latin, foreign words) or specialized vocabulary (technical, financial, judicial…) ? How far should we use presentation techniques that would enhance clarity ? For instance: short paragraphs, numbered paragraphs, titles and subtitles, bold, italics…