Legal Definitions - summing up

In legal contexts, the term summing up has two primary meanings:

• 1. Closing Argument: This refers to the final speech made by an attorney to the judge or jury at the end of a trial. In this address, the lawyer reviews the evidence presented, highlights key points that support their client's case, and attempts to persuade the decision-maker to rule in their favor. It is a strategic opportunity to consolidate their arguments and rebut the opposing side's claims.

  • Example 1 (Civil Dispute): In a lawsuit concerning a disputed property line, the attorney for the plaintiff delivers a summing up, meticulously detailing how surveyor reports, historical deeds, and witness testimonies collectively prove their client's ownership of the contested land. The attorney emphasizes how each piece of evidence aligns with their legal claim.

    Explanation: This illustrates a lawyer's final persuasive argument, summarizing the evidence to convince the court of their client's position regarding the property boundary.

  • Example 2 (Criminal Defense): After weeks of testimony in a complex fraud trial, the defense lawyer's summing up focuses on the lack of direct evidence linking their client to the alleged financial scheme. They systematically point out inconsistencies in the prosecution's witnesses and argue that the state has failed to meet the burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

    Explanation: Here, the defense attorney is making their closing argument, summarizing the weaknesses in the prosecution's case and advocating for their client's acquittal by highlighting the absence of conclusive proof.

• 2. Judge's Review and Instructions (English Law): Specifically in English law, this refers to the judge's comprehensive review of the evidence presented during a trial and their instructions to the jury on the relevant legal principles. This occurs after the closing arguments from both legal teams. The judge's role is to impartially summarize the key facts and evidence, clarify any complex legal terms, and guide the jury on how to apply the law to the facts they have heard to reach a verdict.

  • Example 1 (Criminal Trial in England): In a trial for assault in an English Crown Court, following the prosecution and defense lawyers' final speeches, the judge delivers a summing up. The judge carefully recounts the testimonies of the victim and eyewitnesses, reviews the forensic evidence, and then explains to the jury the legal definition of assault, the concept of self-defense, and how they must weigh the evidence against these legal standards to decide if the defendant is guilty.

    Explanation: This demonstrates the judge's role in an English court to impartially summarize the evidence and instruct the jury on the specific laws they must apply to the facts of the assault case.

  • Example 2 (Civil Trial in England): In an English High Court case involving a claim for breach of contract, after all evidence has been presented and the barristers have made their closing arguments, the judge provides a summing up to the jury. The judge outlines the terms of the contract, reviews the evidence regarding its alleged breach, and then explains the legal requirements for proving a breach and assessing damages, guiding the jury on how to apply these principles to the financial dispute.

    Explanation: This illustrates the judge's function in an English civil trial to review the factual evidence and provide the jury with clear instructions on the legal framework for contract law, enabling them to make an informed decision.