An economic approach on countering the misuse of the right to challenge judges: an experiment

Joep Sonnemans*, Frans van Dijk, Bart Donders, Eddy Bauw

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Parties can challenge a judge (request a recusal) when they have reasons to believe that a judge is not impartial. In practice this procedure is sometimes abused by lawyers who, for example, want to delay proceedings. Countries have taken different measures to deter the improper use of the procedure to request a recusal, like fines for dismissed requests, or immediately dismissing evidently unfounded requests. In a laboratory experiment we examine the effects of a summary review whether a challenge is evidently unfounded, with or without fines. We find that a review without fine improves legal protection in practice as well as efficiency by reducing unfounded challenges and increasing challenges that have a substantial chance of success. Overall the number of challenges declines. With a fine, challenges decline, but also legal protection.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)29-57
Number of pages29
JournalEuropean Journal of Law and Economics
Volume45
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Feb 2018

Keywords

  • Challenge judges
  • Experiment
  • Improper use

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'An economic approach on countering the misuse of the right to challenge judges: an experiment'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this