Nicklas Pettersson () and Katalin Kelemen ()
Additional contact information
Nicklas Pettersson: Örebro University School of Business, Postal: Örebro University, School of Business, SE - 701 82 ÖREBRO, Sweden
Katalin Kelemen: Örebro University, School of Behavioural, Social and Legal Sciences, Postal: Örebro University, School of Behavioural, Social and Legal Sciences, SE - 701 82 ÖREBRO, Sweden
Abstract: We present a systematic quantitative approach how to analyze the reasons that judges in Nordic countries publicly adduce for their decisions in constitutional matters, as implemented in the Nordic CONREASONProject. Based on encodings of forty (per court) purposively selected landmark cases, common traits and patterns of constitutional argumentative practices in each of the Nordic supreme courts were identi ed and an international comparison were made to courts from related studies. Our results provided strong support that, regarding speci c aspects (on a univariate level), one or more courts typically tended to deviate from the other Nordic courts. Also, in a multivariate worldwide comparison there were variation between the Nordic supreme courts. However, although not detached from other supreme courts, the Nordic supreme courts seemed to occupy an area of their own on the international map of constitutional reasoning.
Keywords: constitutional reasoning; quantitative comparative law; empirical legal studies; Nordic exceptionalism; realist decision-making
JEL-codes: C10; C38; C53; K10; K40; N40
Language: English
19 pages, August 14, 2024
Full text files
wp-7-2024.pdf Full text
Questions (including download problems) about the papers in this series should be directed to ()
Report other problems with accessing this service to Sune Karlsson ().
RePEc:hhs:oruesi:2024_007This page generated on 2024-09-13 22:16:32.