Description
Book SynopsisThis book discusses how judges qualify their activities as objective. The data for this project was retrieved from a large sample of cases using Langacker’s methodology. The sample included over a thousand decisions from Brazil, Hungary, Italy, Lithuania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Romania and the UK. The decisions considered allegations of judicial bias, unfairness, and injustice. Pre-judices are shared cognitive methods that legal practitioners perceive as necessary. The results of the study directly confirm Pierre Legrand’s claims of pre-judices in legal discourse, and as corollary, Jules L. Coleman and Brian Leiter’s idea of modest objectivity in law.
Table of ContentsJudicial Impartiality in European Legal Systems – Judicial bias – Truth as a qualifier of judicial objectivity and judicial verophobia – Objective textual interpretation – Objectified judicial discretion – Objectivity as fairness.
