Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Title: A Comparative Analysis of Judicial Performance Evaluation Programmes
Contributor(s): Colbran, S (author)
Publication Date: 2006
DOI: 10.1080/03050710600800046
Handle Link:
Abstract: This article examines judicial performance evaluation in the United States, Nova Scotia, England, and Australia. There are three distinct categories of judicial performance evaluation: traditional forms of accountability, including the principle of 'open justice' and appellate review; analysis of judicial attributes; and court and administrative performance measurement. The first two categories relate to individual judges, the latter to the management and administration of a court in an aggregate sense. It is argued that the traditional approaches to judicial accountability are flawed measures by which to evaluate the performance of individual judges. The analysis of judicial attributes, including legal ability, temperament, communication and other generic skills, as conducted in the United States, Nova Scotia and planned in Australia, offers a viable method for Commonwealth judges to engage in judicial self-improvement as part of judicial method. The application of the criteria to Commonwealth legal systems is discussed. Alternative models, such as that of the English District Court Judges' Association are discussed. It is argued that judges have an ethical duty to embrace self-improvement strategies to supplement traditional approaches to judicial accountability.
Publication Type: Journal Article
Source of Publication: Journal of Commonwealth Law and Legal Education, 4(1), p. 35-67
Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Place of Publication: London
ISSN: 1476-0401
Field of Research (FOR): 180119 Law and Society
Peer Reviewed: Yes
HERDC Category Description: C1 Refereed Article in a Scholarly Journal
Statistics to Oct 2018: Visitors: 79
Views: 79
Downloads: 0
Appears in Collections:Journal Article

Files in This Item:
2 files
File Description SizeFormat 
Show full item record

Page view(s)

checked on Mar 4, 2019
Google Media

Google ScholarTM





Items in Research UNE are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.