Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Title: Diligence as a Criterion for Judicial Performance Evaluation
Contributor(s): Colbran, Stephen (author)
Publication Date: 2002
Handle Link:
Abstract: This article examines aspects of judicial diligence as a measure of judicial performance. Consistent with US and Canadian approaches to judicial performance evaluation, five measures of judicial diligence were proposed to test several hypotheses. The results of a national barristers' survey indicate that appellate judges have significantly higher diligence ratings than trial judges. Female Judges scored significantly lower diligence ratings than male judges. The survey indicates that judicial diligence deteriorates with judicial age or experience. Also, experienced barristers did not rate judicial diligence differently from inexperienced barristers. A national survey of judicial officers revealed that the proposed measures of judicial diligence were all regarded as important. These results are discussed in the context of judicial diligence as a potential measure of judicial performance.
Publication Type: Journal Article
Source of Publication: Griffith Law Review, 11(1), p. 198-222
Publisher: Griffith University, Law School
Place of Publication: Griffith
ISSN: 1038-3441
Field of Research (FOR): 180121 Legal Practice, Lawyering and the Legal Profession
Peer Reviewed: Yes
HERDC Category Description: C1 Refereed Article in a Scholarly Journal
Other Links:§ioncount=&ext=.pdf
Statistics to Oct 2018: Visitors: 139
Views: 141
Downloads: 0
Appears in Collections:Journal Article

Files in This Item:
3 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.