When Some Are Not Enough: Appealing Trial Judgments for Lack of Reasons

Canadian Courts are generally reluctant to overturn a trial decision on the basis that the trial judge failed to provide adequate reasons. Not every finding or conclusion reached at trial needs to be explained. Instead, appellate Courts apply a "contextual approach". They decide if the trial judge's reasons allow for "meaningful appellate review".

Despite the deference shown to reasons of a lower court, appeal Courts are inclined to overturn a decision where the foundation of the trial judge's decision is not explained.

A recent decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal, Dovbush v. Mouzitchka, 2016 ONCA 381 ("Dovbush") illustrates that a trial judge runs afoul of the duty to provide reasons where she only makes generic findings of credibility and fails to resolve key legal issues.