Short notes on the Classification of Judgments and Orders

Once again reference may be made to Halsbury’s Laws of England with reference to classification of judgments and orders.

In Halsbury’s Laws of England it has been said:

“502. Classification of Judgments and Orders:

Judgments may be classified in various ways. A judgment may be a judgment in rem or a judgment in personam. It may be declaratory.

A judgment or order may be final or interlocutory. Judgments and orders against the Crown have a number of special features which require separate consideration.”

“503. Judgments in rem and in personam:

A Judgment in rem may be defined as the judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction determining the status or the disposition of a thing, as distinct from the particular interest in it of a party to the litigation.

A judgment in personam determines the rights of the parties themselves to or in the subject matter in dispute, whether it be corporeal property of any kind whatever, or a liquidated or unliquidated demand, but does not affect the status of either persons or things, or make any disposition of property, or declare or determine any interest in it except as between the parties litigant.

A judgment in personam includes all judgments which are not judgments in rem, but, as many judgments in rem deal with the status of persons and not of things, the description “Judgments inter partes” is preferable to “judgments in personam”.

“504. Final and interlocutory judgments and orders

There is no definition in the Judicature, Acts, or the rules of Court made under them of the terms “final” and “interlocutory”, and a judgment or order may be final for one purpose and interlocutory for another or final as to part and interlocutory as to part.

It is impossible to lay down principles about what is final and what is interlocutory. It is better to look at the nature of the application and not at the nature of the order eventually made.

In general, orders in the nature of summary judgment where there has been no trial of the issues are interlocutory. It is in relation to the issue of a bankruptcy notice and to appeals to the Court of Appeals that the question whether a judgment is final or interlocutory usually arises.”

“505. Final Judgments and Orders:

In general a judgment or order which determines the principal matter in question is termed “final”.

A final judgment has been defined as a judgment in an action by which a previously existing liability of the defendant to the plaintiff is ascertained or established and as a judgment obtained in an action by which the question whether there was pre­existing right of the plaintiff against the defendant is finally determined in favour either of the plaintiff or of the defendant. A final order is nonetheless final by reason that it is subject to appeal and a judgment may be final even though it directs inquiries, or deals with costs only, or is made on any interlocutory application or reserves liberty to apply”.

“Although a judgment dismissing the plaintiff’s action is final, it may be accompanied by a direction that the dismissal is to be without prejudice to the plaintiff’s right to bring another action.

Formerly, where an order was made dismissing an action unless within a specified time the plaintiff took a certain step, and the plaintiff failed to do so, the action was held to be at an end, but in modern cases the Court takes a more liberal view.

The reasoning behind the old cases is that the time limit is included in the order which has been passed and entered and such an order cannot be recalled. By the order the action is dismissed and at an end.

The modern view is that the Court has an inherent jurisdiction and also power under rules of Court to extend the time within which a person is required to do any act in any proceedings. If an order stipulates a time within which a person is required or authorized to do such an act the Court has power to extend the time.”

^“ 506. Interlocutory Judgments and Orders:

An order which does not deal with the final rights of the parties, but either (i) is made before judgment, and gives no final decision on the matter in dispute, but is merely on a matter of procedure or (ii) is made after judgment, and merely directs how the declarations of right already given in the final judgment are to be worked out, is termed interlocutory.”

“An interlocutory order even though not conclusive of the main dispute, may be conclusive as to the subordinate matter with which it deals.”

“The phrase “interlocutary judgment” is also used to describe judgment for damages to be assessed.”

“507. Final and interlocutary judgment and orders for appeal purposes:

Generally speaking, an appeal from a final judgment of a judge lies to the Court of Appeal without leave, but, with certain exceptions no appeal lies from an interlocutory judgments or order of a judge without the leave of judge or of the Court of Appeal.

Any doubts as to what judgments or orders are final and what are interlocutory are to be determined by the Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal may hear an appeal without deciding whether the order appealed against is the one or the other or even where the appellant has misconceived the nature of the order.”

“Appeals to the Court of Appeal from final orders also differ from appeals from interlocutory orders in respect of the time within which they may be brought.”

Judgements can be classified on the basis of a variety of parameters. Judgments with reference to class of Courts are judgements of civil courts, judgments of criminal courts and judgments of revenue Courts.

With reference to the stage of litigation, they are judgments of the trial courts, judgments of the appellate courts and the judgments of the revisional courts. By reference to the nature of the trial, judgements could be in respect of summary trials or regular trials.

Judgments can also be classified with reference to the nature of the dispute namely whether original suits or miscellaneous proceedings. Each variety of the judgments with reference to the specified classification has its own peculiarity, though the broader principle underlying every decision of every Court is one and the same.

Every judgment almost invariably states the facts giving rise to the lis, mentions the points of controversy, decision and the reasons for the decision.