The High Court on Constitutional Law: the 2003 Statistics

Lynch, AN; Williams, G

The High Court on Constitutional Law: the 2003 Statistics

Lynch, AN Williams, G

Permalink

Publisher:: University of New South Wales
Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: University of New South Wales Law Journal, 2004, 27 (1), pp. 88 - 99
Issue Date:: 2004-01

Closed Access

	Filename	Description	Size
	2004000317.pdf		609.59 kB	Adobe PDF	View/Open

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Closed Access

This item is closed access and not available.

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Lynch, AN	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Williams, G	en_US
dc.date.issued	2004-01	en_US
dc.identifier.citation	University of New South Wales Law Journal, 2004, 27 (1), pp. 88 - 99	en_US
dc.identifier.issn	0313-0096	en_US
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/6538
dc.description.abstract	The statistics set out below present information on the High Courts decision-making at both an institutional and individual level for 2003, with an emphasis on constitutional cases as a subset of the total. They have been compiled using a methodology developed by the Harvard Law Review for the United States Supreme Court and adapted for the High Court of Australia,[1] which has previously been used to produce an empirical analysis of the first five years of the Gleeson Court.[2] We do not outline that method again here. The only significant difference is that the data collection was done exclusively using the matters made available on the AustLII database for 2003.[3] It is important to acknowledge at the outset the limitations which inhere in any empirical study over only one year. While the statistics capture what occurred in 2003, the reader should be wary of making broad generalisations about the behaviour of the Court and its justices. For example, where percentage calculations have been given in addition to raw figures these should obviously be treated more warily than those produced after a significantly longer study. Caution is also warranted in the case of Justices Gaudron and Heydon, neither of whom served a full year on the Court in 2003.[4]	en_US
dc.publisher	University of New South Wales	en_US
dc.relation.ispartof	University of New South Wales Law Journal	en_US
dc.title	The High Court on Constitutional Law: the 2003 Statistics	en_US
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.citation.volume	1	en_US
utslib.citation.volume	27	en_US
utslib.for	1801 Law	en_US
pubs.embargo.period	Not known	en_US
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
utslib.copyright.status	closed_access
pubs.consider-herdc	true	en_US
pubs.issue	1	en_US
pubs.volume	27	en_US

Abstract:

The statistics set out below present information on the High Courts decision-making at both an institutional and individual level for 2003, with an emphasis on constitutional cases as a subset of the total. They have been compiled using a methodology developed by the Harvard Law Review for the United States Supreme Court and adapted for the High Court of Australia,[1] which has previously been used to produce an empirical analysis of the first five years of the Gleeson Court.[2] We do not outline that method again here. The only significant difference is that the data collection was done exclusively using the matters made available on the AustLII database for 2003.[3] It is important to acknowledge at the outset the limitations which inhere in any empirical study over only one year. While the statistics capture what occurred in 2003, the reader should be wary of making broad generalisations about the behaviour of the Court and its justices. For example, where percentage calculations have been given in addition to raw figures these should obviously be treated more warily than those produced after a significantly longer study. Caution is also warranted in the case of Justices Gaudron and Heydon, neither of whom served a full year on the Court in 2003.[4]

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/6538