Abstract
Most empirical examinations of hierarchical interactions among the courts are limited to a single judiciary, the American courts. A significant puzzle that remains is the extent to which lower courts in comparative environments follow the legal pronouncements of their court of last resort. We confront this shortcoming by examining lower court adherence to the precedents of the House of Lords in the United Kingdom. As the Law Lords in the United Kingdom primarily oversee a single lower court, the Court of Appeal of England and Wales, this design provides a unique opportunity to assess the factors that influence hierarchical responses to precedent. We offer a framework in which legal, rather than strategic, factors influence the propensity with which lower court judges rely on the precedents of the House of Lords. Using an original data set of over 13,000 lower court responses to the precedents of the House of Lords between 1970 and 2002, our findings challenge the efficacy of principal–agent accounts and shed new light on how horizontal
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
