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.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 198-222 |
| Journal | Griffith Law Review |
| Volume | 11 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| Publication status | Published - 2002 |
Keywords
- Legal Practice, Lawyering and the Legal Profession
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Diligence as a Criterion for Judicial Performance Evaluation'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver