Institutional Aspects of the Nordic Justice Systems: Striving for Consolidation and Settlements

Abstract

This chapter maps the structure of the Nordic justice systems and explores whether and why one could argue that there is a ‘Nordic’ structure. The aim is also to examine recent changes and to investigate whether these entail a cultural shift in some or all Nordic countries. It examines shifts in the intended functions of the courts; changes in the court structure; and the use of alternative dispute resolution outside courts. It argues that the while the private functions of Nordic courts have been accentuated in recent decades in that courts are increasingly expected to facilitate amicable solutions, while alternative dispute resolution outside courts has also been important. It also discusses how the ideal of the generalist judge has been important in consolidating the Nordic court structure. While most of these changes are congruent across the Nordic countries, and have hence strengthened the Nordic court culture, differences among the countries regarding recourse against administrative decisions are growing. New differences among the Nordic countries have emerged and these do not follow the existing divide between the East-Nordic and the West-Nordic countries.

In Data We Trust? Quantifying the Costs of Adjudication in the EU Justice Scoreboard

“…117 The scope of such bodies is broad and covers a variety of disputes related to consumers, personal injuries, family law and recourse against social benefits, to mention a few. 118 To what extent the Scoreboard figures on the expenditure and staff take such bodies into account is unclear. In any case, it affects cross-country comparisons on efficiency and resources.…”