Collective Decision-making - the Current Australian Debate
This article considers some of the central themes of Professor Alan Paterson's studies on the House of Lords and United Kingdom Supreme Court through a discussion of recent judicial reflections in Australia on the benefits and risks of collective decision-making on appellate courts. The author contrasts the quite markedly opposing views expressed by recent and current High Court of Australia judges on the topic of joint judgments and internal processes of decision-making. At the same time he places these alongside the evidence Paterson has amassed about judicial behaviour and attitudes on the same in the United Kingdom. The argument is made that these debates are familiar and tend to be cyclical. The extent to which they are capable of - or even require - resolution remains questionable.