Dissents in Courts of Last Resort: Tragic Choices?

Alder, John

doi:10.1093/ojls/20.2.221

Cited by 23 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Adler's article on dissents in the HL was not quantitative, drew from a small sample of 18 cases, and appeared before the introduction of the HRA. 30 Munday's more systematic study of civil cases in the Court of Appeal between 1999-2001 produced two probing papers. 31 Siems has recently produced a comprehensive statistical analysis comparing citation patterns in the English Court of Appeal with those in the German Federal Supreme Court; the paper also examines cross-citations between the highest courts within the UK.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Law Lords and Human Rights

Poole

Shah²

2011

The Modern Law Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article presents an empirical analysis of the impact of the Human Rights Act on the House of Lords. Drawing on a database of judgments from 1994 to 2007, changes in judgment‐giving behaviour are identified by charting patterns of agreement and dissent across different categories of case. Voting records are also examined in order to identify whether significant differences exist between individual Law Lords in their approach to human rights cases.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Law Lords and Human Rights

Poole

Shah²

2011

The Modern Law Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Majority, as opposed to consensus decision-making has been practised in the English courts since at least the 15th century. In a recent study, John Alder has illuminated some of the practical justifications for, and political resonances of, the dissenting judgment (Alder, 2000). He surmises, for instance, that the possibility of open contradiction serves to sharpen majority judgments.…”

Section: Progress Through Pluralism: the Dissenting Judgmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

‘Red in Tooth and Claw’: The Idea of Progress in Medicine and the Common Law

Harrington

2002

Social & Legal Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The interaction of medicine and the common law is best understood through an examination of the epistemic properties shared (or taken to be shared) by both disciplines. One such property is represented in the ideal of evolutionary progress through a conflict of ideas, as developed in the work of Karl Popper on science and politics. This ideal also provides an orientation for judicial and theoretical reflections on the role of the dissenting judge in the development of the common law. It can be linked furthermore with broader ideologies of progress that valorize liberal political and economic arrangements. The medical negligence jurisprudence of the English courts has until recently been structured by an understanding that medicine, as a science, participates in this dynamic of progress. Consequently, the protection of medical pluralism from close judicial scrutiny has been taken to be a matter of public interest. However, this weak liability regime is now threatened by increased judicial activism, regulatory intervention and patient consumerism. The latter are in turn underpinned by a series of fundamental critiques directed at the idea of progress in medicine and science.

show abstract

Lord Atkin’s Dissent in Liversidge v Anderson: Indecorously Orthodox?

Schultz

2022

Palgrave Modern Legal History

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dissents in Courts of Last Resort: Tragic Choices?

Cited by 23 publications

References 0 publications

The Law Lords and Human Rights

The Law Lords and Human Rights

‘Red in Tooth and Claw’: The Idea of Progress in Medicine and the Common Law

Lord Atkin’s Dissent in Liversidge v Anderson: Indecorously Orthodox?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About