‘Delicate plants’, ‘loose cannons’, or ‘a marriage of true minds’? The role of academic literature in judicial decision-making

Lady Justice Carr
{"title":"‘Delicate plants’, ‘loose cannons’, or ‘a marriage of true minds’? The role of academic literature in judicial decision-making","authors":"Lady Justice Carr","doi":"10.1080/14729342.2023.2222977","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This is the text of the Harris Society Annual Lecture 2023, delivered at Keble College, Oxford, on 16 May 2023. The Lecture is reproduced here with minor editorial changes. The Lecture discusses the role of academic literature in judicial decision-making, and argues that academics help judges to reach decisions that are more conceptually sound, morally satisfactory, and legally coherent. To make this argument, it asks whether academics are ‘delicate plants’ (that is, overly analytical and abstract) or alternatively ‘loose cannons’ (proposing unduly radical suggestions for law reform). After reviewing the historical relationship between academics and the judiciary, a series of cases in which academics have made major contributions to legal development are discussed, including in the field of unjust enrichment and criminal attempts. Following that, cases are discussed in which academic literature might be seen as overly analytical, either because the academics took a more abstract approach than the judiciary, or focussed on socio-economic concerns rather than ‘black letter’ law. It is argued that the concern about academics being ‘delicate plants’ has been overstated and, in particular, the value of socio-economic scholarship should not be underestimated. The next section moves to discuss cases in which judges have disregarded academic literature because it was overly forward-thinking; although, again, the label of academics as ‘loose cannons’, it is argued, is going too far. The Lecture concludes by discussing how academic literature can continue to be applied usefully by judges in the future.","PeriodicalId":35148,"journal":{"name":"Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14729342.2023.2222977","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT This is the text of the Harris Society Annual Lecture 2023, delivered at Keble College, Oxford, on 16 May 2023. The Lecture is reproduced here with minor editorial changes. The Lecture discusses the role of academic literature in judicial decision-making, and argues that academics help judges to reach decisions that are more conceptually sound, morally satisfactory, and legally coherent. To make this argument, it asks whether academics are ‘delicate plants’ (that is, overly analytical and abstract) or alternatively ‘loose cannons’ (proposing unduly radical suggestions for law reform). After reviewing the historical relationship between academics and the judiciary, a series of cases in which academics have made major contributions to legal development are discussed, including in the field of unjust enrichment and criminal attempts. Following that, cases are discussed in which academic literature might be seen as overly analytical, either because the academics took a more abstract approach than the judiciary, or focussed on socio-economic concerns rather than ‘black letter’ law. It is argued that the concern about academics being ‘delicate plants’ has been overstated and, in particular, the value of socio-economic scholarship should not be underestimated. The next section moves to discuss cases in which judges have disregarded academic literature because it was overly forward-thinking; although, again, the label of academics as ‘loose cannons’, it is argued, is going too far. The Lecture concludes by discussing how academic literature can continue to be applied usefully by judges in the future.
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
“娇嫩的植物”,“松散的大炮”,还是“心灵的结合”?学术文献在司法决策中的作用
这是哈里斯协会2023年年度演讲的全文,于2023年5月16日在牛津大学基布尔学院发表。这篇演讲在这里作了一些编辑上的小改动。讲座讨论了学术文献在司法决策中的作用,并认为学术文献有助于法官做出概念上更合理、道德上更令人满意、法律上更连贯的决定。为了提出这个论点,它问学者是“娇弱的植物”(也就是说,过度分析和抽象)还是“松散的大炮”(为法律改革提出过度激进的建议)。在回顾了学者与司法机构之间的历史关系之后,本文讨论了一系列学者对法律发展作出重大贡献的案例,包括在不当得利和犯罪企图领域。在此之后,讨论的案例中,学术文献可能被视为过度分析,要么是因为学术界采取了比司法机构更抽象的方法,要么是关注社会经济问题,而不是“黑字”法律。有人认为,对学术是“脆弱的植物”的担忧被夸大了,特别是社会经济学术的价值不应该被低估。下一节将讨论法官无视学术文献的案例,因为学术文献过于超前;不过,有人认为,再一次给学者贴上“宽松大炮”的标签有点过头了。讲座最后讨论了学术文献如何在未来继续被法官有效地应用。
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
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
7
期刊最新文献
Blurring boundaries on ‘taking part’ in an unlawful assembly: HKSAR v Choy Kin Yue (2022) 25 HKCFAR 360 ‘The law has taken all my rights away’: on India’s conundrum of able-normative death with dignity ‘Delicate plants’, ‘loose cannons’, or ‘a marriage of true minds’? The role of academic literature in judicial decision-making Legal transplantation of minors’ contracts in India and Malaysia: ‘Weak’ Watson and a ‘misfitted’ transplant Corruption and the constitutional position of the Overseas Territories
×
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