When we were in law school, we were both taught that judges were mystical figures, priests who channelled the common law and spoke with almost divine authority. The mask, as Lord Justice Moses has put it, was firmly in place: the mask which ‘evoked the magic by which they discovered and declared the law’.* Since those long-ago days, we have abandoned fairytales and judges have lost some of their mystique. Arguably, they have lost their mask. It is fascinating, therefore, to find out what judges themselves think about the art of judging. This collection features contributions on the art of judging by a range of judges and retired judges. The contributors address topics and themes as diverse as the judge as a consumer of legal services, therapeutic jurisprudence, judicial activism, judicial impartiality, the contribution of particular judges, the role of an intermediate appellate court, the role of the chief justice, the judge’s responsibility to the community, the importance of dissent, and the relevance of masks to the art of judging. Despite the diversity of such topics, a discussion of impartiality and independence as essential to the judicial function can be found in all contributions.
|Journal||Southern Cross University Law Review|
|Publication status||Published - 2008|