Abstract
This paper undertakes an empirical analysis of the dissent patterns of the Court of Appeal during Sir Ivor Richardson's Presidency (1996-2002) using the New Zealand Law Reports and Brookers Ltd electronic Court of Appeal decisions as the data set. Existing literature suggests that there are three main factors in whether a dissenting judgment would be given: judicial workload, the Court's willingness to send out a clear message about the law, and the personalities and attitudes of individual judges. Dissents are also more likely to be common in discretionary decisions and the application of statutory principles. The results show a low rate of multiple judgments and rates of dissent in the Court of Appeal, seemingly as a result of an increase in judicial workload as well as the personality of individual judges.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
