Flanagan, Brian
(2012)
Judicial Globalization and Perceptions of Disagreement: Two Surveys.
New Zealand Law Review, 2012 (3).
pp. 443-463.
ISSN 1173-5864
Abstract
Using data from a 2011 judicial survey that drew responses from the entire New Zealand Supreme Court, I model the Court’s practice of transnational argument. The data suggest that whereas foreign law often appears to contribute to the Court’s legal conclusions, at times its contribution derives from an associated social reward, and at others is flatly illusory. I argue that these findings, in tandem with those of the larger survey, indicate that the law reports systematically misrepresent all judicial disagreement as legal disagreement, thus lending support to the claim that in controversial cases, the law is indeterminate.
| Item Type: |
Article
|
| Additional Information: |
This is the postprint version of the publlished article. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2382788 |
| Keywords: |
foreign law, judicial survey, legal disagreement |
| Academic Unit: |
Faculty of Social Sciences > Law |
| Item ID: |
8914 |
| Depositing User: |
Brian Flanagan
|
| Date Deposited: |
18 Oct 2017 14:08 |
| Journal or Publication Title: |
New Zealand Law Review |
| Publisher: |
Legal Research Foundation |
| Refereed: |
Yes |
| URI: |
|
| Use Licence: |
This item is available under a Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial Share Alike Licence (CC BY-NC-SA). Details of this licence are available
here |
Repository Staff Only(login required)
 |
Item control page |
Downloads per month over past year
Origin of downloads
Altmetric
Altmetric