Lex Pundit
Procedure

The open court principle

Justice must be seen to be done: hearings are public, records are accessible, and secrecy needs justification.

The idea

Common law courts sit in public by default. Anyone may attend, the media may report, and court records are presumptively accessible — because scrutiny is the discipline that keeps testimony honest, judges accountable and public confidence earned. Secret justice, the tradition holds, is not justice.

Openness is a presumption, not an absolute. Courts may protect a child's identity, a police informer, trade secrets or a fair trial — but any restriction must be shown necessary, and tailored no wider than the necessity. The burden falls on whoever asks for the curtain.

An example

A company embroiled in embarrassing litigation asks to seal the entire file. The court refuses: reputational harm alone is not a reason to close a public process — a targeted redaction of genuine trade secrets is as far as it goes.

In Canada

The open court principle is protected by s. 2(b) of the Charter, and the Supreme Court's Sherman Estate test permits limits only where openness poses a serious risk to an important public interest, and only through minimally intrusive orders.