Note 9(ii): Reasons for decisions must be clear, cogent, complete and succinct. A number of decisions do not necessarily require reasons, e.g. unopposed cases and interlocutory rulings, because the reasons are usually self evident. If reasons in such cases are later reasonably required, they must be given within a reasonable time. Note 9(iii): Judgments may be written in a style and manner the judge thinks best. Note 9(iv): A judge may have occasion to express critical views about people during the course of argument or in judgments, e.g. by using unflattering adjectives in regard to a recalcitrant or overzealous party, an uncooperative lawyer, a foot-dragging witness and the like. However, harsh language should be avoided if possible and a judge may not, under the guise of performing judicial functions, make defamatory or derogatory statements actuated by personal spite, ill will, or improper, unlawful or ulterior motive. Note 9(v): Since judges are fallible and can err in relation to fact or law, such errors are to be dealt with through the normal appeal and review procedures. Such errors, even if made by courts of final instance, cannot give rise to valid complaints. Complaints against judges that are related to the merits of a decision or procedural ruling are to be dismissed at the outset. Disenchantment about a judicial decision does not justify disciplinary proceedings. Section 15(2)(c) of the Act specifically provides that a complaint against a judge must be dismissed if it is solely related to the merits of a judgment or order. Note 9(vi): A judge may in appropriate instances advise parties to consider settlement of a case; or put a provisional view in the course of argument. Justice may, however, require that a party be afforded the opportunity to deal with such view.