You know that Stacie Strong is one of the most prolific authors in the field and that she is now in Australia. You may not know, however, that she has a great new book giving the results of a huge empirical project, an in-depth analyses across the judicial-arbitral, national-international and common law-civil law divides, using three different research methodologies.
Here’s the blurb:
Legal Reasoning Across Commercial Disputes: Comparing Judicial and Arbitral Analyses provides important insights into how judges and arbitrators resolve complex commercial disputes in both national and international settings. Using the outcomes of a major international survey and series of semi-structured interviews of judges and arbitrators as well as a statistical (quantitative) analysis of judicial decisions and arbitral awards, the book considers whether and to what extent differences in legal reasoning arise across three major lines of inquiry: the judicial-arbitral divide, the national-international divide, and the common law-civil law divide. Through these techniques, the book provides an evidence-based model that not only helps parties make more informed choices about where and how to resolve their legal disputes, but also assists judges and arbitrators in carrying out their duties by improving counsel’s understanding about how to best to craft and present legal arguments and submissions.
Impressive work, as always. Here’s the link to the publisher’s webpage for the book if you’re interested in checking it out further.