Responsible Jurimetrics: A Reply to Silbert's Critique of the Victorian Court of Appeal

In a recent article in this Journal, ("The First 24 Years of the Victorian Court of Appeal in Crime" (2020) 94 ALJ 455) Gavin Silbert QC examined the frequency with which criminal decisions of the Victorian Court of Appeal ( VCA) have been reversed by the High Court on appeal and contended that the VCA's performance over its first 24 years has declined significantly over time. We argue that his analysis offers an inaccurate and misleading account. Utilising more sophisticated jurimetric analysis, we conclude that the VCA's reversal rates have indeed risen from historic lows, in both criminal and civil matters, but that the Court's performance lies within the historical experience of Australia's intermediate courts of appeal over the past two decades. At a time when practitioners and scholars are making increasing recourse to the allure of statistics, our reply advocates for a more nuanced understanding of the role of intermediate courts of appeal, and highlights the dangers to public confidence in the judicial system of quantitative analysis that lacks methodological rigour.