Research on the English Judicial Process

Abstract

This article is an examination of the English judicial process as a subject of research. My perspective is that of a political scientist whose major field of interest has been American judicial politics. If my subject were the House of Commons or party politics in Britain, it would be appropriate to focus my examination upon an evaluation of the relevant political science literature. But political scientists thus far have virtually ignored the English courts as an object of study; the limited scholarship done on this set of institutions has been contributed chiefly by social scientists in other fields and by legal scholars. For this reason, my primary goal is not to assess the existing literature on the judicial process. Rather, I wish to communicate this literature to political scientists and to suggest directions that they might take in studying the judicial branch.

Detailing Judicial Difference

“…At present, beyond (indeed despite) ongoing claims of uniformity and homogeneity, the law lords continue to be a relatively mysterious and inscrutable bunch. The study of the judicial process in England and Wales as a subject of research remains largely underdeveloped (Baum 1977; but see Darbyshire 2008;Dickson 1999;Paterson 1982;Robertson 1982;Stevens 1979;Blom-Cooper and Drewry 1972). In particular, our tendency in general to follow developments in the law according to legal topic or theme rather than by person means that while we may well have a sense or impression of an individual law lord it is likely that this corresponds closely to, and stems from, assessments of his opinions in our own particular areas of expertise and interest, and that, as a result, we know little of their jurisprudence outside of these relatively narrow confines.…”