| Abstract [eng] |
Motivation of a court judgment (based on Lithuanian and foreign countries‘ Case Law) The subject-matter of this master thesis is the analysis of regulating rules of law and the sources of law doctrine, with reference to examples of Lithuanian and some other foreign countries‘ case law. The Code of Civil Procedure of Lithuanian Republic indicates the duty of the courts to motivate their judgments. However, this duty is not always properly embodied i.e. the decisions sometimes are not argumented or they are argumented in not the most suitable way. Seeking to discover the importance of the reasoning of court judgment, the first part of this master thesis contains analysis of types and structure of court judgments and also the significance and place of motivating part in court judgment. The second part of master thesis contains the research of development and alternation of reasoning of court judgment in Lithuania. This is done by using the historical method of analysis. It is important to accentuate that in all historical stages that are being discussed in this thesis, there was a requirement for judges to motivate their decisions, although the content of motivating part and the carrying and publication of judgment were not always the same. While using the descriptive, systematic, logical and analysis of rule of law methods, the peculiarities of reasoning of court judgment of every court instance are being discussed. This analysis led to a conclusion that the courts of different instances do not have to use the same decision argumenting technique. The reasoning of court judgment is based on the purpose of each instance. The third part of this master thesis contains the requirements for court judgments in various European countries and the USA. It also discusses the requirements for motivation of judgments of the European Court of Justice. The main conclusions of this master thesis are that the proper reasoning of court judgment is an obligatory condition to ascertain the right to a fair trial. And also that the postponing of writing of the motivating part of the decision does not make any influence to its quality and particularity. |
