The term judgment (AE)[1] or judgement (BE) generally refers to the considered evaluation of evidence in the formation of making a decision. The term has three distinct uses:
Contents |
In formulating cognitive judgements, a formal process of evaluation applies. A judgment may be expressed as a statement, e.g. S1: "A is B" and is usually the outcome of an evaluation of alternatives. The formal process of evaluation can sometimes be described as a set of conditions and criteria that must be satisfied in order for a judgement to be made. What follows is a suggestive list of some conditions that are commonly required:
JUDGMENT, in law, a term used to describe (I) the adjudication by a court of justice upon a controversy submitted to it inter partes (post litem contestatam) and determining the rights of the parties and the relief to be awarded by the court as between them; (2) the formal document issuing from the court in which that adjudication is expressed; (3) the opinions of the judges expressed in a review of the facts and law applicable to the controversy leading up to the adjudication expressed in the formal document. When the judgment has been passed and entered and recorded it binds the parties: the controversy comes to an end (transit judicatam), and the person in whose favour the judgment is entered is entitled to enforce it by the appropriate method of "execution." There has been much controversy among lawyers as to the meaning of the expressions "final" and "interlocutory" as applied to judgments, and as to the distinction between a "judgment," a "decree," and an "order." These disputes arise upon the wording of statutes or rules of court and with reference to the appropriate times or modes of appeal or of execution.
The judgments of one country are not as a rule directly enforceable in another country. In Europe, by treaty or arrangement, foreign judgments are in certain cases and on compliance with certain formalities made executory in various states. A similar provision is made as between England, Scotland and Ireland, for the registry and execution in each country of certain classes of judgments given in the others. But as regards the rest of the king's dominions and foreign states, a "foreign" judgment is in England recognized only as constituting a cause of action which may be sued upon in England. If given by a court of competent jurisdiction it is treated as creating a legal obligation to pay the sum adjudged to be due. Summary judgment may be entered in an English action based on a foreign judgment unless the defendant can show that the foreign court had not jurisdiction over the parties or the subject matter of the action, or that there was fraud on the part of the foreign court or the successful party, or that the foreign proceedings were contrary to natural justice, e.g. concluded without due notice to the parties affected. English courts will not enforce foreign judgments as to foreign criminal or penal or revenue laws.
Categories: JOP-JUX | Criminal law | Civil and business law
The sentence or final order of a court in a civil or criminal proceeding, enforceable by the appropriate modes of execution appointed by law. In criminal cases, according to Talmudic law, the judgment was pronounced by the chief of the court in the presence of the accused (Sanh. 79b; Maimonides, "Yad," Sanh. xiv. 7; ib., Roẓeaḥ, iv. 7). If the judgment was for acquittal it could not be reversed; but if it was for conviction it could be reversed, and another trial instituted either at the plea of the convict, after presenting a sufficient reason, or at the instance of new witnesses appearing for the defendant (see Acquittal; Execution).
In civil cases, also, judgment was pronounced by the presiding judge. The formula was very simple: "A, thou art guilty"; "B, thou art innocent." The judgment could be pronounced even if the parties concerned were not present (Shulḥan 'Aruk, Ḥoshen Mishpaṭ, 18, 6; comp. ib. 13, 6). If one of the litigants wished to have a written copy of the judgment, the court might furnish him with one before the litigants left the court-room, but not after, because it was apprehended that they might settle the case between themselves outside. The formula for a written judgment was as follows: "A and B came before the court, and in its opinion A is guilty and B is innocent." Neither in the written nor in the spoken sentence should the names of the judges be included (Sanh. 30a; "Yad," Sanh. xxii. 8; Ḥoshen Mishpaṭ 19, 2; comp. ib. 39, 9-10).
The reasons for the decision were included in the judgment only when the judges noticed a dissatisfaction on the part of the litigants, or when one of the litigants asked for the reasons. The prevailing custom, however, was to explain the reasons of a judgment only when one of the litigants was compelled to appear before a certain court, though he wished to be judged by another. In such a case he had to pay the money immediately on the receipt ofthe judgment note; and if the decision was reversed by another court the money was refunded to him. A high and famous court need not assign any reason for its decisions (Sanh. 31b; Tosef., Sanh. s.v. "We'im"; B. M. 69b; Tosef., B. M. s.v. "Ki"; Ḥoshen Mishpaṭ, 14, 4, Isserles' gloss).
The judges were not permitted to divulge to the public their individual opinions of any case after it had been decided. On one occasion a disciple was expelled from the court-room because he related the opinions of the judges in a case twenty-two years after its trial (Sanh. 31a; "Yad," Sanh. xxii. 7).
A judgment in civil cases could be reversed at the instance of either of the parties. Even if the court ordered them to produce all new testimony within thirty days, and they brought new testimony after that period, the judgment might be reversed and a new trial instituted. If at the question of the court one of the litigants admitted that he could bring no other testimony, and then produced new testimony, which, however, could have been obtained before, the judgment could not be reversed. But if he brought witnesses who were in a distant land at the time of the trial, or testimony of which he might have had no previous knowledge, a new trial was usually granted (Sanh. 31a; "Yad," Sanh. vi. 6-8; Ḥoshen Mishpaṭ, 20, 1).
For reversal of judgment in cases of appeal to higher courts see Appeals. See also Excommunication; Execution.
Bibliography: Bloch, Die Civilprocess-Ordnung, pp. 84-87, Budapest, 1882; Mendelsohn, Criminal Jurisprudence, pp. 148-152, Baltimore, 1891.
The word judgment (also spelled:judgement) means making a decision about what is the best thing to do, or what should be done, or what to think about something. Judgment should be made after thinking carefully about all evidence that is available.
The word can be used in different ways:
  | LDOCEonline - judgment - Definition from Longman English Dictionary Online |
| | Cambridge Dictionary - Cambridge Dictionaries Online - Cambridge University Press |
|
|
Top topics
Wikis
Quiz
Misc
Search
