IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ris/apltrx/0371.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How to measure the quality of court decisions? A case of commercial courts

Author

Listed:
  • Sidorova, Elena

    (National Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow, Russian Federation;)

  • Golovanova, Svetlana

    (National Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow, Russian Federation;)

  • Avdasheva, Svetlana

    (National Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow, Russian Federation;)

Abstract

The research proposes an econometric model for assessing the factors, influencing the quality of court decisions, including time judge spends on the case, on the example of cases on antitrust law violations. We use wo types of models: the basic binary choice model, where the dependent variable is the quality indicator of the court decision, and the two-step method for evaluating the binary choice probit model with the instrumental variable of the costs of the case consideration in the court of the first instance and the inclusion of such control variables as regional, time and industrial effects. Empirical results are robust among model modifications, the analysis shows that time spent on a case consideration does not influence the quality of decisions judge makes.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:ris:apltrx:0371
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://pe.cemi.rssi.ru/pe_2019_54_126-143.pdf
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Andrey Makarov, 2019. "Anti-competitive agreements in Russian courts (2008–2012): antitrust law implementation and interpretation," Post-Communist Economies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(3), pages 383-395, May.
    2. Stefan Voigt, 2006. "The Economic Effects of Competition Policy Cross Country Evidence Using Four New Indicators," ICER Working Papers 20-2006, ICER - International Centre for Economic Research.
    3. Dimitrova-Grajzl, Valentina & Grajzl, Peter & Slavov, Atanas & Zajc, Katarina, 2016. "Courts in a transition economy: Case disposition and the quantity–quality tradeoff in Bulgaria," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 18-38.
    4. Martin Carree & Andrea Günster & Maarten Schinkel, 2010. "European Antitrust Policy 1957–2004: An Analysis of Commission Decisions," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 36(2), pages 97-131, March.
    5. Chopard Bertrand & Fain Edwige & Roussey Ludivine, 2018. "Does the Appeals Process Reduce the Occurrence of Legal Errors?," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 14(2), pages 1-18, July.
    6. N. Pavlova & A. Shastitko., 2014. "Effects of Hostile Tradition in Antitrust: Active Repentance versus Cooperation Agreements?," VOPROSY ECONOMIKI, N.P. Redaktsiya zhurnala "Voprosy Economiki", vol. 3.
    7. Michael R. Baye & Joshua D. Wright, 2011. "Is Antitrust Too Complicated for Generalist Judges? The Impact of Economic Complexity and Judicial Training on Appeals," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 54(1), pages 1-24.
    8. 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.
    9. Hüschelrath, Kai & Smuda, Florian, 2014. "The appeals process: An empirical assessment," ZEW Discussion Papers 14-063, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    10. Kim Economides & Alfred A. Haug & Joe McIntyre, 2013. "Are Courts Slow? Exposing and Measuring the Invisible Determinants of Case Disposition Time," Working Papers 1317, University of Otago, Department of Economics, revised Nov 2013.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Berlemann, Michael & Christmann, Robin, 2017. "The Role of Precedents on Court Delay - Evidence from a civil law country," MPRA Paper 80057, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Florian Smuda & Patrice Bougette & Kai Hüschelrath, 2015. "Determinants of the Duration of European Appellate Court Proceedings in Cartel Cases," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(6), pages 1352-1369, November.
    3. Svetlana Avdasheva & Svetlana Golovanova & Elena Sidorova, 2022. "Does judicial effort matter for quality? Evidence from antitrust proceedings in Russian commercial courts," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 53(3), pages 425-450, June.
    4. S. Avdasheva & S. Golovanova & Y. Katsoulacos, 2019. "Optimal Institutional Structure of Competition Authorities Under Reputation Maximization: A Model and Empirical Evidence from the Case of Russia," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 54(2), pages 251-282, March.
    5. 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.
    6. Svetlana Avdasheva & Dina Tsytsulina & Svetlana Golovanova & Yelena Sidorova, 2015. "Discovering the Miracle of Large Numbers of Antitrust Investigations in Russia: The Role of Competition Authority Incentives," HSE Working papers WP BRP 26/PA/2015, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    7. Moral, Alfonso & Rosales, Virginia & Martín-Román, Ángel, 2021. "Professional vs. non-professional labour judges: their impact on the quality of judicial decisions," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    8. Marvão, Catarina, 2014. "Heterogeneous Penalties and Private Information," Konkurrensverket Working Paper Series in Law and Economics 2014:1, Konkurrensverket (Swedish Competition Authority).
    9. 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.
    10. Gupta, Maansi & Bolia, Nomesh B., 2024. "Factors affecting efficient discharge of judicial functions: Insights from Indian courts," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    11. M. J. Schmidt-Kessen & R. Nogueira & M. Cantero Gamito, 2020. "Success or Failure?—Effectiveness of Consumer ODR Platforms in Brazil and in the EU," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 43(3), pages 659-686, September.
    12. Stefan Voigt, 2016. "Determinants of judicial efficiency: a survey," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 183-208, October.
    13. Roussey, Ludivine & Soubeyran, Raphael, 2018. "Overburdened judges," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 21-32.
    14. Patrice Bougette & Oliver Budzinski & Frédéric Marty, 2019. "Exploitative Abuse and Abuse of Economic Dependence: What Can We Learn From an Industrial Organization Approach?," Revue d'économie politique, Dalloz, vol. 129(2), pages 261-286.
    15. R. Forrest McCluer & Martha A. Starr, 2013. "Using Difference in Differences to Estimate Damages in Healthcare Antitrust: A Case Study of Marshfield Clinic," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(3), pages 447-469, November.
    16. 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.
    17. Samantha Bielen & Wim Marneffe & Peter Grajzl & Valentina Dimitrova-Grajzl, 2018. "The Duration of Judicial Deliberation: Evidence from Belgium," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 174(2), pages 303-333, June.
    18. 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.
    19. Bougette, Patrice & Deschamps, Marc & Marty, Frédéric, 2015. "When Economics Met Antitrust: The Second Chicago School and the Economization of Antitrust Law," Enterprise & Society, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(2), pages 313-353, June.
    20. John Szmer & Robert K. Christensen & Samuel Grubbs, 2020. "What influences the influence of U.S. Courts of Appeals decisions?," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 49(1), pages 55-81, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    court efficiency; judicial decision-making; duration of the case; antitrust infringements;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • K41 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior - - - Litigation Process
    • P37 - Political Economy and Comparative Economic Systems - - Socialist Institutions and Their Transitions - - - Legal

    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:ris:apltrx:0371. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Anatoly Peresetsky (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://appliedeconometrics.cemi.rssi.ru/ .

    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.