Knowledge about how Canadian judges write decisions and how people read and interact with decisions is sparse. In comparison to the United States (where data suggests that length and complexity is a long standing problem), Canadian courts, judges, and scholars have little to no data on Canadians’ views about judicial decisions. This lack of knowledge is curious and potentially problematic. Canadian judges are supposed to write for the public, and many Canadian judges also say they write for the losing party. Yet most of what Canadian judges know about the individuals who read their decisions is based on intuition and anecdote.
My surveys seek to fill this gap in 2023. To interact with the people and groups who use judicial decisions and gain insight about their user experience, I’m surveying these groups:
the judges who write judicial decisions; and
the people who read, use, and interact with judicial decisions: Canadian common law s. 96 and appeal courts; lawyers; academics; lawyers that courts employ, aka staff lawyers or legal officers; journalists; law students; federal and provincial parliamentarians; Assistant and Associate Deputy Ministers; litigants; legal research, legal publishing, and legal tech organizations; and legal information professionals.
The survey goal is generating useful information about user views and experiences. The surveys include quantitative and qualitative questions that address judicial independence; judicial decision-making; judicial decision-writing; court and judicial transparency; judicial decisions; judicial decision-reading; and access to justice related issues. These surveys seek to provide insight on questions like “what do people need from judicial decisions”; “how do Canadian judges write judicial decisions”; and similar questions about accessing information about the court system, access to justice, judicial decisions, and judicial decision-making. Survey answers could greatly improve the principal investigator’s research recommendations.