Conference Agenda

In the European judiciary, there are various approaches to assessing the resources required for the efficient functioning of the judiciary and their fair and efficient distribution among the various courts. The German system is called “PEBB§Y”.

“PEBB§Y” (“Personalbedarfsberechnungssystem) is a case case-weighting system. It has been designed for the calculation of workload of judges and non-judicial staff on an empirical-analytical basis (time-studies). It is used extensively for budget negotiations with the ministries of finance, for the allocation of staff to the appeal court districts and within the appeal court districts and for a transparent distribution of the workload. Based on an analysis of typical cases (“empirical and analytical approach“), the so called PEBB§Y basic numbers represent the average processing time of different case-type categories. The PEBB§Y-basic numbers are revised periodically. The upcoming review will be in 2027.

PEBB§Y does not determine the time required to process a case. It is based on the time required to proceed similar cases in the past. Moreover, staff demand (workload) is not created in the year when the case comes in but in later years, nevertheless PEBB§Y (in general) counts the numbers of incoming cases. This poses a number of challenges for the courts involved. In view of the upcoming review and the discussions in other European countries about the introduction of a case weighting system, it is worth taking a look at the challenges and opportunities of the system.

The discussion that has been going on for many years about the basis for the creation of a target model of justice, despite the numerous ideas and proposed solutions, leads to the unquestionable conclusion that the organization of court work in the 21st must be adapted to the requirements of civil society. Citizens have the right to expect that the state's actions in discharging the courts' constitutional obligations to provide legal protection and the administration of justice will be carried out in a professional manner within the time limits defined as “without reasonable delay.”

The purpose of this article is to analyze the international body of work on judicial leadership and identify the main research streams and areas for further exploration. Judicial leadership is a key element of judicial efficiency and effectiveness, encompassing both managerial and normative aspects. The article conducts a systematic review of the literature, taking into account theoretical models of leadership, its institutional conditions and its impact on the organization and culture of work in the courts. Particular attention was paid to the relationship between leadership and judicial independence. The review indicates a growing interest in the issue, also revealing the paucity of empirical research and the need for further conceptualization of the concept. It concludes with prospects for future research, emphasizing the importance of an interdisciplinary approach and comparative analysis of different legal systems.

Society, as well as the economy, needs efficient courts - knowledge-based public organizations. The judiciary around the world is more or less struggling with the problem of protractedness and bottlenecks in adjudication and cases. Reformers' efforts in dealing with the protractedness of court proceedings around the world have included adapting techniques and methods for managing business organizations. Reports and analyses of studies conducted show that the primary problem in implementing the changes were court leaders (presidents and court directors) who were unprepared for the changes. They were unable to manage the change, communicate the vision of the change and engage judges and administrative staff of the courts (E. Dupont, F. Schoenaers, S. Gibens, B. Hubeau, A. Jonckheere, V. Mahieu, Ch. Mincke, C. Tange 2018). Considering that leadership on the part of public managers is necessary because without leadership, public organizations will never mobilize to achieve their goals (Behn, 1998, Barzelay, 2001), and the judiciary faces the important challenge of creating an organization that carries out the key processes within it in an efficient manner, the purpose of the article project is to diagnose leadership in the courts as a philosophy of court management in the context of the new economy, with a particular focus on the concept of jurisprudential, administrative, community and social leadership. The new economy, based on technology, innovation and intellectual capital, is forcing a transformation of the ways in which public institutions, including the judiciary, are managed. The article is based on a review of national and international literature and presents the results of a survey and semi-structured IDI (Individual In-depth Interview) interviews among presidents and directors of common courts in Poland. The study identifies the dominant leadership styles in courts and assesses their effectiveness in the context of the challenges of the new economy, such as the digitization of court processes, knowledge management and the increase in the efficient use of resources in courts. The conclusion emphasizes the need to develop an interdisciplinary approach to court management, taking into account both legal, organizational and economic aspects.