Rota Judge, Parties Must Get Own Copy of Sentence

2.1.2 Secondly, the sentence must be published, or more precisely, must be communicated to the parties by giving or sending a copy of the sentence (art. 258, § 1). This is true also for those countries in which the judges are hesitant about giving a complete copy of the sentence for fear that it might be used improperly, especially in the civil sphere, or worse, as part of a penal case before a civil court. I hold that in such cases, instead of usingprætor legum [beyond the law] ways (as to invite the parties to read the sentence in the tribunal offices, in front of an official who can grant the needed explanations), it is needed to follow the law in force, applying some measures in the drafting of the sentence. In fact, article 254, § 2 admonishes that the revelation of the facts, inasmuch as it is required by the nature of the question, must be done with prudence and caution, avoiding any offense to the parties, to the witnesses, etc. For the rest, if it would be an odious thing, it is not necessary to refer to the names of the witnesses: it is sufficient, in such cases, to summarize the proofs with precise references to places in the acts (specifying the page, and when possible, the internal number). It is important that from the reason (motivation) of the sentence results the foundation whether in iure [in law] or in facto [in fact] of the dispositive part, or more precisely, that it should be clear that the judges have reached the decision by some logical path (art. 254, § 1).
(page 127)