IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/oec/ecoaab/5-en.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Judicial Performance and its Determinants: A Cross-Country Perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Giuliana Palumbo

    (OECD)

  • Giulia Giupponi
  • Luca Nunziata
  • Juan S. Mora-Sanguinetti

Abstract

Well functioning judiciaries are key to economic development. Combining existing information with a newly collected dataset, the paper provides cross-country comparisons of measures of judicial performance, and investigates how cross-country differences in trial length are related to the underlying characteristics of judicial systems. There is a large cross-country variation in trial length across all instances, which appears to be related to the share of the justice budget devoted to computerisation, the systematic production of statistics the active management of the progress of cases, the presence of specialised commercial courts and the managerial responsibilities assigned to the chief judge. Good quality regulation, is associated with lower litigation, which in turn can shorten trial length. Free negotiation of lawyers’ fees also appears to be associated with lower litigation.

Suggested Citation

  • Giuliana Palumbo & Giulia Giupponi & Luca Nunziata & Juan S. Mora-Sanguinetti, 2013. "Judicial Performance and its Determinants: A Cross-Country Perspective," OECD Economic Policy Papers 5, OECD Publishing.
    • Handle: RePEc:oec:ecoaab:5-en
    DOI: 10.1787/5k44x00md5g8-en
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1787/5k44x00md5g8-en
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1787/5k44x00md5g8-en?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Garcia-Hombrados, Jorge & Martínez Matute, Marta, 2021. "Specialized Courts and the Reporting of Intimate Partner Violence: Evidence from Spain," IZA Discussion Papers 14936, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    2. Auerbach, Jan U. & Fonseca, Miguel A., 2020. "Preordered service in contract enforcement," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 130-149.
    3. Giuseppina Gianfreda & Giovanna Vallanti, 2017. "Informality and productivity: do firms escape EPL through shadow employment? Evidence from a regression discontinuity design," Working Papers 2017-01, Universita' di Cassino, Dipartimento di Economia e Giurisprudenza.
    4. Decio Coviello & Luigi Moretti & Giancarlo Spagnolo & Paola Valbonesi, 2018. "Court Efficiency and Procurement Performance," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 120(3), pages 826-858, July.
    5. Bielen, Samantha & Peeters, Ludo & Marneffe, Wim & Vereeck, Lode, 2018. "Backlogs and litigation rates: Testing congestion equilibrium across European judiciaries," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 9-22.
    6. Sidorova, Elena & Golovanova, Svetlana & Avdasheva, Svetlana, 2019. "How to measure the quality of court decisions? A case of commercial courts," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 54, pages 126-143.
    7. Juan S. Mora-Sanguinetti & Marta Martínez-Matute, 2019. "An economic analysis of court fees: evidence from the Spanish civil jurisdiction," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 321-359, June.
    8. Saibal Ghosh, 2018. "Corporate investment and political federalism: does judicial efficiency matter?," Indian Economic Review, Springer, vol. 53(1), pages 263-285, December.
    9. Edward Peter Stringham, 2017. "The fable of the leeches, or: The single most unrealistic positive assumption of most economists," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 30(4), pages 401-413, December.
    10. Giuseppina Gianfreda & Giovanna Vallanti, 2017. "Informality and productivity: do firms escape EPL through shadow employment? Evidence from a regression discontinuity design," Working Papers 2017-01, Universita' di Cassino, Dipartimento di Economia e Giurisprudenza.
    11. Fauvrelle Thiago A. & Tony C Almeida Alessio, 2018. "Determinants of Judicial Efficiency Change: Evidence from Brazil," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 14(1), pages 1-36, March.
    12. Thiago Christiano Silva & Iftekhar Hasan & Benjamin Miranda Tabak, 2021. "Financing choice and local economic growth: evidence from Brazil," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 329-357, September.
    13. Pavithra Manivannan & Susan Thomas & Bhargavi Zaveri, 2022. "Evaluating contract enforcement by courts in India: a litigant's lens," Working Papers 16, xKDR.
    14. Panagiotis Barkas & Mauro Pisu, 2018. "Boosting investment in Greece," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 1506, OECD Publishing.
    15. Balázs Égert & Antoine Goujard, 2014. "Strengthening Competition in Poland," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 1125, OECD Publishing.
    16. Lara Wemans & Manuel Coutinho Pereira, 2015. "Determinants of civil litigation in Portugal," Economic Bulletin and Financial Stability Report Articles and Banco de Portugal Economic Studies, Banco de Portugal, Economics and Research Department.
    17. Andrea Zorzi, 2016. "A European Nevada? Bad Enforcement As an Edge in State Competition for Incorporations," Working Papers 2016:12, Department of Economics, University of Venice "Ca' Foscari".

    More about this item

    Keywords

    accessibility; accessibilité; appeal rates; caractéristiques des systèmes judiciaires; durée de procès; fonctionnement de la justice; institutional characteristics of judicial systems; judicial performance; litigation; taux d'appel; taux de litige; trial length;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D02 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Institutions: Design, Formation, Operations, and Impact
    • K40 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior - - - General
    • K41 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior - - - Litigation Process

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oec:ecoaab:5-en. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/edoecfr.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.