European Journal of Law and Economics

, Volume 7, Issue 2, pp 161–175 | Cite as

The Undesirability of Detailed Judicial Reasoning

  • MOSHE BAR NIV (BURNOVSKI)
  • ZVI SAFRA
Article

Abstract

In this paper we question the general practice in which Common Law based judicial systems produce detailed written decisions. The requirement to produce written court decisions is expensive and helps produce long delays. Furthermore, we show that the general applicability of detailed reasoning may be inefficient. Our method of proving this claim is to show that the individual litigants have almost nothing to gain from having a detailed written reasoning. In fact, most of the time, they are clearly better off by being able to switch to a policy that requires no written opinion. Our approach is most appropriate in circumstances of pecuniary private disputes where the parties involved act as rational utility, or profit, maximizers.

Litigation process detailed judicial reasoning 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Copyright information

© 1999 Kluwer Academic Publishers 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • MOSHE BAR NIV (BURNOVSKI)
    • 1
  • ZVI SAFRA
    • 2
  1. 1.School & Law, Interdisciplinary Center and Bar-Ilan UniversityIsrael
  2. 2.Faculty of ManagementTel Aviv UniversityTel AvivIsrael

Personalised recommendations