The use of non-domestic legal sources in Supreme Court of Canada judgments: Is this the judicial slowbalization of the court?

IF 0.6 Q2 Social Sciences Utrecht Law Review Pub Date : 2020-05-26 DOI:10.36633/ulr.584
Klodian Rado
{"title":"The use of non-domestic legal sources in Supreme Court of Canada judgments: Is this the judicial slowbalization of the court?","authors":"Klodian Rado","doi":"10.36633/ulr.584","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Observed from the perspective of citation of foreign judgments, the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) is often considered one of the world’s most cosmopolitan and proactive actors in transnational judicial conversation. However, there are also other forms of non-domestic legal sources that Courts engage with, such as: foreign law, international case law, and international treaties. Hence, the ‘globalist’ or ‘localist’ approach of a court cannot be assessed without looking from this broader perspective. By examining all the 1223 judgments issued by the SCC over 17 years (2000–2016), this study offers a comprehensive picture of citations of all forms of non-domestic legal sources. Remarkably, the empirical data show that the Court has extensively engaged with all forms of non-domestic legal sources, and cites such foreign authorities in approximately 50 different fields of law. This article is distinct in that it combines two different perspectives when analyzing the data: the SCC as an institution and its individual judges. From an institutional perspective, such all-inclusive records demonstrate that foreign citation is decreasing, a trend which may jeopardize the high prestige of the SCC in the global arena. Similar trend is noticeable when the data is analyzed also from an individual-judge perspective. In providing an empirical picture of individual judges’ engagement with non-domestic legal sources, this Article attempts to categorize the 21 justices that have served in the SCC during the 17-year timeframe into three groups: ‘high globalist judges’, ‘moderate globalist judges’, and ‘localist judges’. The article ends with few remarks regarding whether this is a judicial slowbalization of the Court.","PeriodicalId":44535,"journal":{"name":"Utrecht Law Review","volume":"16 1","pages":"57-85"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Utrecht Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36633/ulr.584","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Observed from the perspective of citation of foreign judgments, the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) is often considered one of the world’s most cosmopolitan and proactive actors in transnational judicial conversation. However, there are also other forms of non-domestic legal sources that Courts engage with, such as: foreign law, international case law, and international treaties. Hence, the ‘globalist’ or ‘localist’ approach of a court cannot be assessed without looking from this broader perspective. By examining all the 1223 judgments issued by the SCC over 17 years (2000–2016), this study offers a comprehensive picture of citations of all forms of non-domestic legal sources. Remarkably, the empirical data show that the Court has extensively engaged with all forms of non-domestic legal sources, and cites such foreign authorities in approximately 50 different fields of law. This article is distinct in that it combines two different perspectives when analyzing the data: the SCC as an institution and its individual judges. From an institutional perspective, such all-inclusive records demonstrate that foreign citation is decreasing, a trend which may jeopardize the high prestige of the SCC in the global arena. Similar trend is noticeable when the data is analyzed also from an individual-judge perspective. In providing an empirical picture of individual judges’ engagement with non-domestic legal sources, this Article attempts to categorize the 21 justices that have served in the SCC during the 17-year timeframe into three groups: ‘high globalist judges’, ‘moderate globalist judges’, and ‘localist judges’. The article ends with few remarks regarding whether this is a judicial slowbalization of the Court.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
加拿大最高法院判决中使用非国内法律来源:这是法院的司法缓慢吗?
从引用外国判决的角度来看,加拿大最高法院(SCC)通常被认为是世界上跨国司法对话中最国际化和最积极的参与者之一。然而,法院也有其他形式的非国内法律来源,如:外国法、国际判例法和国际条约。因此,如果不从这个更广泛的角度来评估法院的“全球主义”或“地方主义”方法,就无法进行评估。通过审查SCC在17年(2000-2016)内发布的1223份判决,本研究提供了所有形式的非国内法律来源的引用的全面情况。值得注意的是,经验数据表明,法院广泛参与了各种形式的非国内法律来源,并在大约50个不同的法律领域引用了这些外国当局的案例。这篇文章的不同之处在于,它在分析数据时结合了两个不同的视角:SCC作为一个机构和其个人法官。从机构的角度来看,这些包罗万象的记录表明,外国引文正在减少,这一趋势可能会危及SCC在全球舞台上的崇高声誉。当同样从个人法官的角度分析数据时,类似的趋势是显而易见的。在提供个别法官与非国内法律来源接触的经验图片时,本文试图将17年期间在SCC任职的21名法官分为三组:“高级全球主义法官”、“温和全球主义法官’和“地方主义法官”。文章最后几乎没有谈到这是否是法院的司法缓慢化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
审稿时长
17 weeks
期刊最新文献
Field Experiments Examining Trust in Law: Interviewer Effects on Participants with Lower Educational Backgrounds Legitimacy as Expressed versus Legitimacy as Experienced: Methodologies to Assess an Elusive Concept Towards Evidence-Based Legitimacy Interventions in EU Law: Challenges and Directions for Empirical Research Digitalisation of Enforcement Proceedings (Re)defining Conflicts: Democratic Legitimacy in Socially Sensitive Court Cases
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1