Judicial Performance Evaluation and Settlement Skills

Abstract

This article proposes five measures of judicial settlement skills, which may be used in an Australian pilot program for judicial performance evaluation. The measures are evaluated by a national survey of barristers and a national survey of judicial officers. The data was also verified by a series of judicial key informant interviews. Both barristers and judicial officers who responded to the surveys thought the proposed measures of judicial settlement skills were important measures of judicial performance. The measures have a high level of internal consistency for barristers but not for judicial officers. There was considerable divergence amongst judicial officers concerning the measures. No significant gender bias was evident in the data. Male and female judges were perceived to be similar performers on settlement skills. Curiously, appellate judges were perceived to be better performers than first instance judges. There was a strong indication that judicial settlement skills decline with judicial age and experience. Consistent with the approaches adopted in Alaska, New Jersey, Hawaii, Arizona and Nova Scotia, any pilot judicial performance evaluation program in Australia should include measures related to judicial settlement skills. This is all the more necessary with the increasing use of and encouragement for alternative dispute resolution techniques and the rise of managerial judging.