Methodological accountability in systematic case law analysis: Insights from an Empirical Analysis in the Netherlands

As systematic case law analysis becomes more extensive and intricate as an approach to doing legal research, the need to justify the methods and techniques used for data collection, selection, and analysis grows correspondingly. Without such methodologicalaccountability, the relia-bility and replicabilityof this type of legal (empirical) research are com-promised, undermining their contribution to legal scholarship and prac-tice. This article investigates the methodological accountability in sys-tematic case law analysis. We conducted an empirical study to evaluate how researchers in the Netherlands account for their processes of col-lecting, selecting, and analyzing legal decisions and opinions of dispute resolution bodies. Our meta-analysis of systematic case law analysis en-compasses 105 academic studies that utilize systematic case law analy-sis, providing an overview of the current state-of-the-art in the Nether-lands. Based on the findings of our case study, we offer best practice guidelines for ensuring methodological accountability in systematic case law analysis.