What are the reasons for judgment in a sexual assault case?

In deciding whether the trial judge gave sufficient reasons, the following factors apply: i. Reasons for judgment must be sufficient so as to allow for meaningful appellate review; ii. Although credibility determinations made by a trial judge are given a high degree of deference, a failure to sufficiently articulate credibility concerns may result in reversible error; iii. To assess the sufficiency of reasons, an appellate court must read those reasons as a whole in the context of the evidence, submissions and the trial; and iv. The trial judge is not required to review each piece of evidence as long as the reasons generally demonstrate the acceptance of the complainant’s evidence in preference to the defendant’s evidence. See R v. Vuradin, 2013 SCC 38 [Vuradin] at paras. 10-13.

Sufficient reasons are necessary because an accused is entitled to know why the trial judge was left with no reasonable doubt as to their guilt: R v. Gagnon, 2006 SCC 17 at para. 23.