Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

1 results

  • 9 - Individual Judicial Style and Institutional Norms

  • from Part III - The Judiciary as a Collective
  • Edited by Gabrielle Appleby, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Andrew Lynch, University of New South Wales, Sydney
  • Book:
    The Judge, the Judiciary and the Court
    Published online:
    04 May 2021
    Print publication:
    29 April 2021, pp 208-232

  • Summary

    What is encompassed by the idea of ‘style’ in judicial reasons and why might this be of value and something worth striving for in a judge’s performance of their role? Through a synthesis of judicial pronouncements on the topic from judges in common law jurisdictions, the author identifies recurring themes and typologies that are used by judges when they reflect upon what is meant by style – and the manifestations of which are to be, respectively, applauded and emulated or lamented and avoided. Lynch frames this discussion in the context of the High Court of Australia’s contemporary practice of ‘joining in’ to a draft opinion any justice who agrees with it, so that individual authorship is obscured from plain view. This practice reveals an interesting dynamic between the individual and institutional conceptions of the judicial role. 'Joining in' , and its consequences for the benefits that are to be obtained by the conscious development of individual judicial style, is contrasted with the modes of collective expression of agreement in the final courts of the United Kingdom and United States.