There is an accountability mechanism in place in this country and it's the three pronged operation of the Common Law, legislation and the Constitution. Team this with the other two heads of power and you supposedly have the perfect democratic system. We should stop blaming judges for perceived inadequacies in the law - they can only rely on what is there before them, either in the legislation or in the law reports and what it says about the the matter before them. That is the accountability mechanism. There are times when the law is wholy inadequate, not the reasoning of a judge. In this respect their individual preclivities don't come into play - they can't.

As to the plagirism issue, there have been instances in past High Court benches where intellectually strong judges wrote the majority judgment for their brother judges on the bench as well as the dissent! By all accounts this happened a lot in the Dixon court, Sir Owen being all powerful, McTiernan and Rich being weak judges. I don't see the issue in principle. What's worse...?, copying a mates work or getting him to do the whole thing for you?