Collective Decision-making - the Current Australian Debate

Abstract

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.