Read more
List of contents
1: Introduction, Context and Methodology
Sources and Methodology
Judicial Notebooks
Elite Interviews
The Drawbacks of Oral History
Definitions
2: The Dialogue with Counsel
Introduction
The Context of the Dialogue Between Counsel and the Judges in the Final Court
Expectations which Constrain
Initiating the Dialogue
The Courtroom Dialogue
How has the Dialogue Between Counsel and The Court Changed?
Have the Qualities of Good Appellate Advocacy Changed?
Persuasive Advocacy
Robustness and Resilience
Courage
Timing
Written Advocacy
Does Advocacy Matter in the Final Court?
Case Studies in Effective Advocacy
Factors Which Make a Difference
Conclusion
3: Dialogues with Colleagues—The Stages for Discourse
Introduction
The Preparatory Stages
Laying the Groundwork
Involvement in Permission to Appeal Decisions
Being Chosen: The Selection of the Hearing Panel
Doing the Homework: Reading of the Preliminary Materials
The Oral Hearing
Judicial Dialogues in the Courtroom
Conclaves Off-stage: Dialogue Outside the Courtroom
The First Conference
Sharing of Preliminary Conclusions and Discussion
The Allocation of the Lead Judgment
Implications for the Future
The Drafting Stage
Order and Production of Circulation
Multiple Judgments and the Pursuit of Unity
Dissenting Opinions
Circulation Time
Conclusion
4: Dialogues with Colleagues—Efficacy in Judicial Dialogues
Introduction
Context
Stages
Time and Timing
The Composition of the Panel
Approaches to Collective Decision-Making: The Art of Persuasion
Engagement of Judgments
Team-working
Leadership in the House of Lords
Dissents, Individualism and Collegiality
Task Leadership and the US Supreme Court
Social Leadership
Leadership Skills in the Supreme Court
Social Leadership in the Supreme Court
Geography
Conclusion
5: Inter-Judicial Dialogues in Practice
Voting Relationships
Changes of Mind
The Bingham Era 2000–09
The UK Supreme Court 2009–13
Conclusion
6: Wider Dialogues Old and New
The Dialogue with the Court of Appeal
The Dialogue with Academics
Dialogues with Courts Overseas
The Dialogue with Strasbourg
Scots Appeals and London: A Fraught Relationship?
Deference
The Devolution Issues Jurisdiction
Conclusion
The Dialogue with Judicial Assistants
The Job of the Judicial Assistant
7: The Dialogue with Other Branches of Government
Setting the Scene
The Dialogue with Parliament
Judicial Activism and its Drawbacks
Hard Cases Make Bad Law
Justice, Certainty and Fairness
Drawing the Line
Who Really Draws the Line?
Where Should the Lines be Drawn?
Arguments from Parliamentary Activity and Inactivity
Lines of Communication
Conclusion
The Dialogue with the Executive
Intra-governmental Relations
Attempts by the Executive to Engage with the Court
Accountability
The Challenge of Accountability
8: Final Reflections
About the author
Alan Paterson, LLB (Edin), DPhil (Oxon), Solicitor, OBE, FRSA, FRSE is a Professor of Law and Director of the Centre for Professional Legal Studies at the Strathclyde University Law School. His research has focused on the legal profession, access to justice, poverty legal services and the judiciary.
Summary
Drawing on over 100 interviews, including a total of 36 Law Lords, this book provides a compelling and unrivalled view into the workings of the Court during its final decade, and into the formative years of the Supreme Court.
Additional text
…the book makes an invaluable contribution to our understanding of judicial decision-making, since it is based on information that was unavailable so far, and without Paterson’s research would have been lost to posterity. It is not an exaggeration to say that Final Judgment “provides a compelling and unrivalled view” into appellate judicial decision-making in the UK (i), and must be compulsory reading for everyone interested in how the UK Supreme Court works.
