THE IDEA OF ACCESS TO JUSTICE: REFLECTIONS ON NEW ZEALAND’S ACCIDENT COMPENSATION (OR PERSONAL INJURY) SYSTEM
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this article is to bring clarity in thinking about access to justice. We examine the idea of access to justice in the reform of personal injury law in New Zealand. Our findings are applicable to law reform in any area of law involving vulnerable people. After tracing the legal history of “access to justice,” we isolate four separate conceptions of access to justice: equality before the law, a hybrid of judicial and non-judicially focused conceptions that we have called the multifactorial conception, and conceptions emphasizing either judicial or non-judicial elements. We identify key features of each conception, and its strengths and weaknesses, in order to improve the quality of dialogue in law reform efforts. We conclude by considering the implications of our findings for law, which allow comparisons to be made between systems of law and law reform that aim to improve access to justice. Cet article a pour but d’apporter des éclaircissements dans la réflexion concernant l’accès à la justice. Les auteurs y étudient l’idée de l’accès à la justice dans la réforme du droit du préjudice personnel en Nouvelle-Zélande. Leurs conclusions sont applicables à la réforme du droit dans n’importe quel domaine touchant les personnes sans défense. Après avoir reconstitué l’histoire juridique de l’« accès à la justice », les auteurs isolent quatre conceptions distinctes de cette notion : l’égalité en droit, une conception hybride comportant des éléments judiciaires et non judiciaires et des conceptions privilégiant soit les éléments judiciaires, soit les éléments non judiciaires. Les auteurs cernent les principales caractéristiques de chacune de ces conceptions, leurs forces et leurs faiblesses afin d’améliorer la qualité du dialogue dans les efforts de réforme du droit. Ils concluent en évoquant les répercussions de leurs conclusions pour le droit, ce qui permet l’établissement de comparaisons utiles entre les systèmes juridiques et une réforme du droit qui prétend favoriser l’accès à la justice.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.045 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".