Barrister gender and litigant success in the High Court of Australia

We examine the relationship between gender of the barrister and appeal outcomes on the High Court of Australia. We find that an appellant represented in oral argument by a female barrister, opposed to a respondent represented in oral argument by a male barrister, is less likely to receive a High Court justice's vote. However, we also find that the appellant disadvantage of having a female barrister present oral argument is (partially) offset in the case of liberal justices and on panels having a higher proportion of female justices. The extent to which the disadvantage is offset, and potentially turns from being a disadvantage to an advantage, depends on the degree to which the justice is liberal and the proportion of female justices on the panel.

本文探讨律师性别与诉讼结果之间的关系。我们发现这个过程并不对称。如果是由女律师上诉,而辩方是一个或一个以上男性律师,那么性别就是一个因素。不过并不存在相反的情况。我们具体发现,如果诉方是一个女律师,辩方为一男律师,诉方就不大可能获得最高法官的赞同。不过,我们还发现,如果法官具有自由主义精神,如果法官团的女性比例较高,那么女律师的不利情形就有可能被（部分地）抵消。被抵消的程度取决于法官自由精神的强弱,和法官团女性比例的大小。     

High Court Review 2002: The Least Dangerous Branch

The article provides a general political review of recent High Court decisions and explores the extent to which the judiciary can be said to be the 'least dangerous branch'. By examining recent events such as the 'Kirby incident', as well as the important judgments handed down by the High Court concerning Native Title, IVF and the Web, it seeks to delineate the influence and changing role of the High Court in Australian politics and constitutionalism. This is the Australian Journal of Political Science 's second annual review of the Australian High Court from a political-science perspective.     

The role of attitudinal,institutional and environmental factors in explaining variations in the dissent rate on the High Court of Australia

This paper examines the role of attitudinal, institutional and environmental factors in explaining the dissent rate on the High Court of Australia (hereafter High Court) using data for the period 1904–2001. The paper's main conclusion is that the majority of attitudinal and institutional factors tested are important predictors of variation in the dissent rate while the urbanisation rate, which is used to measure socio-political complexity, has no statistically significant effect on the High Court's dissent rate.     

High Court Review 2001: Politics,Legalism and the Gleeson Court

This article provides a general political review of recent High Court decisions that have significant implications for Australian constitutionalism. In examining the Court's judgments on issues such as cross-vesting schemes, immigration and Native Title, it seeks to articulate major themes in the Court's jurisprudence and delineate the important and changing role of the High Court in Australian politics. The article is the first in what this journal intends to be an annual review of the High Court from a political-science perspective.     

Historical Consensual Norms in the High Court

There is a substantial political-science literature that discusses the notion of consensual norms in the US Supreme Court. Most of this literature assumes that consensual norms exist, rather than proving their existence. Caldeira and Zorn ( American Journal of Political Science 42: 874-902, 1998) use the method of cointegration developed in econometric time-series analysis to prove the existence of a single consensual norm in the US Supreme Court. This study applies cointegration analysis to historical time-series data on dissenting and single judgments to examine whether there is a single consensual norm in the High Court of Australia. The study finds that a single consensual norm does not underlie decision making in the High Court. This result is explained on the basis that the institutions underpinning decision making and the approach to decision making are different between the Australian High Court and the US Supreme Court.     

High Court review 2003: the centenary year

2003 marked the Centenary year of the High Court, an anniversary which provides an opportunity to revisit debates about its role in the Australian system of government. The first section of this article canvasses debates around this question, culminating in a consideration of the High Court's ‘new politics’. This sets the framework for an examination of events in 2003 from the perspective of the interaction between the judicial and other branches of government, in particular the executive. The article analyses the implications of executive interventions in relation to the judiciary, as well as important cases brought before the High Court. It argues that conflict between the executive and judicial branches is only likely to increase where contradictions of purpose arise between international legal norms and obligations, the rule of law and domestic policy objectives. This article is the third in a series of reviews of the High Court from a political‐science perspective published in the Australian Journal of Political Science.     

The Other Supreme Court

相似文献   

High court review 2005: The manifestation of separation of powers in Australia

In 2005 questions were raised in public debate regarding the scope, meaning and manifestation of the constitutional separation of powers and the role of the High Court in interpreting these. In particular, the issue of the efficacy of checks and balances within the system of government against potential abuses of executive powers was raised, due to the dominance of the legislature by the executive for the first time in 24 years. This Review argues that while the High Court staunchly defended its independence and the role of the judiciary in a division of powers, it demonstrated a simultaneous reluctance to curb executive powers. This has implications for the manifestation of separation of powers in the Australian context, both in terms of its philosophical foundations and in so far as it signals a trend away from the likely realisation of public expectations of its role as expressed in appeals made to it.     

High Court Review 2004: Limits on the Judicial Protection of Rights

The High Court's role of judicial review has often been examined for its impact on rights protection, an area of particular interest in Australia due to the historical lack of an explicit bill of rights in either statutory or constitutional form. In 2004 rights issues were presented in particularly stark relief in several key cases, demonstrating the difficulties of the role of judicial review in the Australian constitutional framework. The cases analysed here produce compelling evidence of the limitations of relying on judicial review for rights protection within the Australian system of government. They demonstrate that in the absence of a clearer framework for the protection of rights the judiciary can uphold unambiguous decisions of the legislature enshrined in statute, even where and when those provisions are considered to override the rule of law, international standards and human rights principles.     

Lathom House: The Northern Court

Abstract

Thomas Stanley is credited with the creation of a fine new house at Lathom when he was made earl of Derby in 1485. This house, according to the poets and writers if the 16th and 17th centuries, was a sumptuous and well-defended place surrounded by moats and with as marry as eighteen towers. Indeed, it was claimed that Henry VII, stepson if the first earl if Derby, based his design for Richmond Palace on Lathom. After the house had fallen to the Parliamentarians it is usually accepted that the place was razed to the ground and, since the latter years of the 18th century, there has been considerable debate regarding its location. Recent archaeological work at the site if a later house, designed by Giacomo Leoni, is now providing evidence to show that Leoni's building probably lay on the site of the earlier structure and that some if the medieval masonry was incorporated into the rubble fill if the 18th-century walls. This study now examines the evidence for the first earl of Derby's house and argues that Lathom should be considered amongst the most important late 15th-century houses in England and Wales.