Selecting the cases that defined Europe: Complementary metrics for a network analysis

Do case citations reflect the “real” importance of individual judgments for the legal system concerned? This question has long been puzzling empirical legal scholars. Existing research typically studies case citation networks as a whole applying traditional network metrics stemming from graph theory. Those approaches are able to detect globally important cases, but since they do not take time explicitly into account, they cannot provide a comprehensive account of the dynamics behind the network structure and its evolution. In this paper we provide such a description, using two node importance metrics that take time into account to study important cases in the Court of Justice of the European Union over time. We then compare cases deemed as important by the metrics, with a set of 50 cases selected by the Court as the most important (landmark) cases. Our contribution is twofold. First, with regard to network science, we show that structural and time-related properties are complementary, and necessary to obtain a complete and nuanced picture of the citation network. Second, with regard to the case law of the Court, this study provides empirical evidence clarifying the motivation of the Court when selecting the landmark cases, revealing the importance of symbolic and historical cases in the selection. In addition, the temporal analysis sheds new light on the network properties specific to the landmark cases that distinguishes them from the rest of the cases. We validate our results by providing legal interpretations that sustain the highlights provided by the proposed network analysis.

[1]  Tommaso Agnoloni,et al.  The Case Law of Italian Constitutional Court between Network Theory and Philosophy of Information , 2016 .

[2]  Thomas A. Smith.  The Web of Law , 2005 .

[3]  Theo Tryfonas,et al.  Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications , 2009 .

[4]  K. Alter.  The New Terrain of International Law: Courts, Politics, Rights , 2014 .

[5]  Sergey Brin,et al.  Reprint of: The anatomy of a large-scale hypertextual web search engine , 2012, Comput. Networks.

[6]  Mattias Derlén,et al.  Goodbye Van Gend En Loos, Hello Bosman? Using Network Analysis to Measure the Importance of Individual CJEU Judgments , 2014 .

[7]  Seth J. Chandler,et al.  The Network Structure of Supreme Court Jurisprudence , 2007 .

[8]  Fabien Tarissan,et al.  Analysing the first case of the International Criminal Court from a network-science perspective , 2016, J. Complex Networks.

[9]  Shai Dothan.  Reputation and Judicial Tactics: A Theory of National and International Courts , 2014 .

[10]  Radboud Winkels,et al.  Determining Authority of Dutch Case Law , 2011, JURIX.

[11]  U. Šadl.  The role of effet utile in preserving the continuity and authority of European Union law : evidence from the citation web of the pre-accession case law of the court of justice of the EU , 2015 .

[12]  Urska Sadl,et al.  A 'Selfie' from Luxembourg: The Court of Justice and the Fabrication of the Pre-Accession Case-Law Dossiers , 2016 .

[13]  Pierre Mazzega,et al.  Codification, Law Article and Graphs , 2007, JURIX.

[14]  James H. Fowler,et al.  Abstract Available online at www.sciencedirect.com Social Networks 30 (2008) 16–30 The authority of Supreme Court precedent , 2022 .

[15]  Tim S. Evans,et al.  Transitive Reduction of Citation Networks , 2013, J. Complex Networks.

[16]  Krzysztof J. Pelc.  The Politics of Precedent in International Law: A Social Network Application—ERRATUM , 2014, American Political Science Review.

[17]  Ryan Whalen,et al.  Modeling Annual Supreme Court Influence: The Role of Citation Practices and Judicial Tenure in Determining Precedent Network Growth , 2012, CompleNet.

[18]  Ioannis Anagnostopoulos,et al.  Network Analysis in the Legal Domain: A complex model for European Union legal sources , 2015, J. Complex Networks.

[19]  S. Puig.  Social Capital in the Arbitration Market , 2014 .

[20]  Luis Miguel Poiares Pessoa Maduro,et al.  The Past and Future of EU Law: The Classics of EU Law Revisited on the 50th Anniversary of the Rome Treaty , 2010 .

[21]  Martin Rosvall,et al.  Significant Communities in Large Sparse Networks , 2011, PloS one.

[22]  Fabien Tarissan,et al.  Temporal Properties of Legal Decision Networks: A Case Study from the International Criminal Court , 2015, JURIX.

[23]  T. Neale.  Citation Analysis of Canadian Case Law , 2013 .

[24]  Romain Boulet,et al.  A network approach to the French system of legal codes—part I: analysis of a dense network , 2011, Artificial Intelligence and Law.

[25]  E. Voeten,et al.  Precedent in International Courts: A Network Analysis of Case Citations by the European Court of Human Rights , 2011, British Journal of Political Science.