The one end of procedure
What is a court's method actually for? Bentham allows procedure a single end, the correct decision, reached with the least delay, expense, and vexation it can manage.
The whole and only proper end of procedure, Bentham holds, is a correct decision: the guilty convicted, the innocent cleared, the party in the right prevailing, reached with the least possible delay, expense, and vexation to those caught up in it. Everything a court does is to be judged against that end and nothing else. Against it he sets a natural system modelled on how a sensible head of a household would settle a dispute, hear everyone, look at everything, decide on the merits, with a single judge and no artificial bars to relevant testimony. A rule that does not serve the correct decision has no claim to survive.
- utility
- legal theory
- jurisprudence
- evidence
- utilitarianism
- access to justice
Enter a dialogue
- Someone caught up in a lawsuit is worn down by delay and expense before any verdict; what does your one end say a court owes them?
- Isn't your single test, the correct decision at least cost, too simple for a system that must also protect rights and follow settled forms?
- How does judging every rule of court by whether it reaches the right decision differ from respecting a rule because it is long-established?
- To model courts on a sensible head of household deciding on the merits, what safeguards of formal procedure must a society be willing to lose?