As the consultation process begings for a unitary authority for Cambridge, Puffles has asked a series of questions. Cambridge is a slightly odd place for a bunch of idiosyncratic but long term reasons.
That has led to a set of effects of “Cambridge”, that aren’t just “we cycle, a lot”. When you look at Richard’s photo, what do you see?
A benefit of having research use for datasets, is that you can do research on them, to start to look at interesting questions.
Keeping the Bailii Streisand cache of URLs (we’ll come back to what’s shown from their “updated” processes in a future post), we can start to infer things about case loads.
All data in this post is freely available here.
Are there really more judgements coming from ECHR, and if so, why?
There are more judgements, arising from two jumps in 2000 and 2008/2009. The 2008/2009 jump has started to reduce a bit, but 2000 is resulting from the implementation of the Human Rights Act when it became easier, even if there were many cases beforehand.
But without a full and comprehensive archive of UK case law as there is from the EU, there’s no clarity on why ECHR figures are going up slower than the High Court figures…
The spreadsheet contains all the links, if you fancy working out why…