Morten Nadim

• Nadim, Morten (2026). International Constitutionalism: The Impact of International Law on Constitutional Reasoning in the Norwegian Supreme Court. In Kelemen, Katalin (Eds.), Constitutional Reasoning in the Nordic Supreme Courts. Hart Publishing Ltd. ISSN 9781509991549. p. 125–150. doi: 10.5040/9781509991518.ch-006. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  This book explores the argumentative style of the supreme courts in the Nordic countries (Denmark, Iceland, Finland, Norway and Sweden). Its findings are based on empirical research involving 280 leading constitutional cases which demonstrate that the impact of a constitutional ruling often extends far beyond the cases actually adjudicated by the courts and that it is crucial to understand how judges justify their decisions in constitutional cases. In the cases researched, the authors identify and explain the common features of the Nordic constitutional reasoning, situating the Nordic experience within a broader comparative framework. The book compares these practices with those of non-Nordic jurisdictions, analysing whether and how the approaches of Nordic supreme courts align with each other and with global trends. This is made possible through the use of a well-established conceptual and methodological framework, adapted to the Nordic context. Key aspects of judicial reasoning are examined, including the emphasis placed on specific constitutional concepts, the use of non-legal arguments, the reliance on precedents, and the types of sources typically referenced – such as preparatory works, foreign legal materials, and academic writings. The book is aimed at anyone interested in the constitutional culture of the Nordic countries and informs normative debates on constitutional law, both in scientific and political discourse. It contributes to the global academic discourse on constitutional reasoning with a unique perspective from the Nordic countries, which have often been overlooked in comparative research.

• Kelemen, Katalin; Dahlberg, Maija; Elmerot, Åsa; Fogde, Mikael Kenno; Karlsson, Haukur Logi & Krunke, Helle [Show all 8 contributors for this article] (2026). Exploring Constitutional Reasoning in the Nordic Supreme Courts Empirically: An Introduction. In Kelemen, Katalin (Eds.), Constitutional Reasoning in the Nordic Supreme Courts. Hart Publishing Ltd. ISSN 9781509991549. p. 1–22. doi: 10.5040/9781509991518.ch-001. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  This book explores the argumentative style of the supreme courts in the Nordic countries (Denmark, Iceland, Finland, Norway and Sweden). Its findings are based on empirical research involving 280 leading constitutional cases which demonstrate that the impact of a constitutional ruling often extends far beyond the cases actually adjudicated by the courts and that it is crucial to understand how judges justify their decisions in constitutional cases. In the cases researched, the authors identify and explain the common features of the Nordic constitutional reasoning, situating the Nordic experience within a broader comparative framework. The book compares these practices with those of non-Nordic jurisdictions, analysing whether and how the approaches of Nordic supreme courts align with each other and with global trends. This is made possible through the use of a well-established conceptual and methodological framework, adapted to the Nordic context. Key aspects of judicial reasoning are examined, including the emphasis placed on specific constitutional concepts, the use of non-legal arguments, the reliance on precedents, and the types of sources typically referenced – such as preparatory works, foreign legal materials, and academic writings. The book is aimed at anyone interested in the constitutional culture of the Nordic countries and informs normative debates on constitutional law, both in scientific and political discourse. It contributes to the global academic discourse on constitutional reasoning with a unique perspective from the Nordic countries, which have often been overlooked in comparative research.

• Kelemen, Katalin; Dahlberg, Maija; Elmerot, Åsa; Fogde, Mikael Kenno; Karlsson, Haukur Logi & Krunke, Helle [Show all 8 contributors for this article] (2026). Constitutional reasoning in the Nordic supreme courts: A comparative empirical analysis. International Journal of Constitutional Law. ISSN 1474-2640. 24(2), p. 580–625. doi: 10.1093/icon/moag060. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  Abstract This article presents the first comparative empirical study of constitutional rea­soning in the Nordic countries (Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden). Drawing on forty leading constitutional cases from each of the seven examined courts, the authors apply the CONREASON method to map how arguments and key constitutional concepts are used in judicial decision-making. The study situates Nordic courts within a global comparative framework, highlighting both shared regional features and notable divergences. It shows that, despite differences in constitutional texts and institutional arrangements, the Nordic courts exhibit a distinctive combination of deference to parliamentary intent and cautious judicial review. Preparatory works occupy an unusually prominent role in constitutional interpretation, particularly in Finland and Sweden, whereas Norway and Iceland rely more heavily on precedents. At the same time, all Nordic courts display high levels of engagement with international human rights law—especially the European Convention on Human Rights—while showing limited openness to foreign influence and intra-Nordic dialogue in this field. The article also examines the use of core constitutional concepts such as the rule of law and separation of powers, revealing how their application reflects deeper legal-cultural mentalities and historical contexts. By combining quantitative and qualitative analysis, the study provides new insights into the evolving Nordic constitutional culture and its position on the global spectrum of constitutional reasoning. It concludes by discussing the potential future challenges posed by Europeanization, internationalization, and political change for the traditionally restrained role of Nordic courts.

• Nadim, Morten (2017). Den offisielle fortellingen - De norske hemmelige tjenesters virksomhet 1945-1995. In Ryymin, Teemu (Eds.), Historie og Politikk - Historiebruk i norsk politikkutforming etter 1945. Universitetsforlaget. ISSN 9788215029085. p. 200–220. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2015). Forskning på personskadeerstatning i praksis. Tidsskrift for erstatningsrett, forsikringsrett og velferdsrett. ISSN 1891-8956. p. 82–101. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten & Sunde, Jørn Øyrehagen (2015). A call for more diversity: A comment to Schaffer et al. Retfærd: Nordic Journal of Law and Justice. ISSN 0105-1121. 38(1 = 148), p. 43–48. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2014). Rettsulikhet i straffeutmålingen. Tidsskrift for strafferett. ISSN 1502-685X. 14(1), p. 26–44. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2014). Large and small systems : development in argumentation in the Norwegian Supreme Court 1970-2010. Retfærd: Nordic Journal of Law and Justice. ISSN 0105-1121. 37(1 = 144), p. 3–16. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2013). Er Høyesterettsdommere politisk farget? - En undersøkelse av 17 dommeres votum i dissenssaker. Lov og Rett. ISSN 0024-6980. p. 655–672. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  Artikkelen er et svar til statsviterne Gunnar Grendstad, William R. Shaffer og Eric N. Waltenburgs artikkel i Lov og Rett 2012 nr. 4, der det hevdes at dommernes yrkesbakgrunn, utnevnelsesregjering og fødested kan forklare høyesterettsdommernes voteringsmønster. Artikkelen ser på dommeradferd med kvantitativ metode for å undersøke gyldigheten av påstandene fra statsviterne. Et utvalg dommeres votum i dissenssaker mellom offentlig og privat part er analysert for å se om noen dommere i større grad voterer for enten privat eller offentlig part. Resultatene er holdt opp mot noen av dommernes objektive kjennetegn for å se om det er noen sammenheng som kan forklare dommeradferd. Artikkelen er skrevet i forbindelse med forfatterens masteravhandling om samme emne.

View all works in NVA

• Nadim, Morten (2026). Ankeutvalget - rettsutviklingens portvoktere. Universitetsforlaget. ISBN 9788215043586. 195 p. Full text in Research Archive
• Harstad, Johanne Løvli & Nadim, Morten (2024). Innføring og oppgavesamling i sivilprosess. Universitetsforlaget. ISBN 9788215068442. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2023). Precedents in the 21st century. Karnov Group Norway AS. ISBN 9788293816669. Full text in Research Archive

View all works in NVA

• Nadim, Morten (2026). Constitutional reasoning in the Norwegian Supreme Court. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2026). NORDIC CONREASON: Nordiske høyesteretter som konstitusjonsdomstoler - en empirisk og komparativ studie av nordiske høyesteretters grunnlovsbruk. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2026). Ankeutvalget - rettsutviklingens portvoktere. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2026). Kjennetegn som kan forutsi om Høyesteretts ankeutvalg vil henvise en sak til behandling - Rett24. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  Det er 93 prosent sjanse for at ankeutvalget vil fremme klimakvotesaken til behandling i Høyesterett, ifølge artikkelforfatterens statistiske analyse.

• Nadim, Morten (2026). Donsskriving siden 1970. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2026). Prinsipiell eller ikke prinsipiell? Det er spørsmålet - Ankesiling i Høyesterett. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2026). Hvordan representere en part? Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2026). Prinsipiell eller ikke prinsipiell? Det er spørsmålet - Ankesiling i Høyesterett. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2026). Prinsipiell eller ikke prinsipiell? Det er spørsmålet - Ankesiling i Høyesterett. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2026). Prinsipiell eller ikke prinsipiell? Det er spørsmålet - Ankesiling i Høyesterett. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2026). Prinsipiell eller ikke prinsipiell? Det er spørsmålet - Ankesiling i Høyesterett. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2026). Ankesiling i sivile saker - Hva kjennetegner dommene Høyesterett fremmer til behandling i avdeling. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2026). Har jeg råd til å få rett - Rettsikkerhetsutfordringer ved kostnadsutviklingen i domstolene. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2026). Fra tekst til tall - Metoder for statistiske analyser av rettspraksis. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2026). Ankeutvalget - rettsutviklingens portvoktere. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2026). Ankeutvalget - rettsutviklingens portvoktere. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2026). Ankeutvalget - rettsutviklingens portvoktere. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2026). Domsskriving siden 1970. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2026). Domsskriving siden 1970. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2026). Domsskriving siden 1970. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2026). Hvordan representere en part? Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2025). Muntlige ferdigheter i jusutdanningen. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2025). Å håndtere usikkerhet i jussen: Perspektiver fra undervisning og læring. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2025). Grunnlovsanvendelse i de nordiske høyesterettene - en empirisk og rettslig analyse. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2025). Norwegian methods of civil litigation and adjudication - Structure, Principles & Procedures. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2025). Hvordan representere en part. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2025). Institutthistorien sett utenfra. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2025). Hvordan representere en part? Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2025). Panelsamtale om "Har eg rettstryggleik". Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2024). Høyesterettsdommere foren eder. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2024). Fra skoleeksamen til mappeevaluering - omlegging av JUS4212. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2024). KI TeachMeet - Rettshistorie som eksempel. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2024). Constitutional reasoning in the Nordic Supreme Courts. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2024). Constitutional reasoning in the Nordic supreme courts. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2024). Høyesterett som historikere. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2023). ChatGPT og Hjemmeeksamen. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2023). Kun det prinsipielle er godt nok - Høyesterett(er)s kontroll med forvaltningen. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2023). Høyesteretts portvoktere. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2023). Stortingsadministrasjonens rettslige stilling. Lov og Rett. ISSN 0024-6980. p. 345–346. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2022). The Norwegian Legal Culture - an overview. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2022). Nordic CONREASON: Nordiske høyesteretter som konstitusjonsdomstoler - en empirisk og komparativ studie av nordiske høyesteretters grunnlovsbruk. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2021). THE NORWEGIAN SUPREME COURT - An Institutional Overview. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2018). Sverre Flaatten: Høyesterett, straffen og tyveriene. Tidsskrift for samfunnsforskning (TfS). ISSN 0040-716X. 59, p. 214–217. doi: 10.18261/issn.1504-291X-2018-02-05. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2016). Personskade-erstaningsrett i praksis: Norske praktikeres syn på personskadeerstatningsretten i praksis, og på aktørene som operer i dette feltet. Full text in Research Archive
• Sunde, Jørn Øyrehagen & Nadim, Morten (2016). The Personal Injury Claim Process in Norway. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2016). THE NORWEGIAN PIC LAW AND SYSTEM. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2016). Hva er passe straff? Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2016). Intervju om straffenivå i forbindelse med Forskningsdagene UNG. [Radio]. NRK Hordaland. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2015). Et annerledes kildemateriale. Personskadeerstatningsretten: Et høyst praktisk rettsområde. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2015). Personal injury law in practice. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2015). 200 år med Høgsterett. [Internet]. På høyden. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2015). Dommeradferd i Norges Høyesterett, Empiriske funn - en kommentar. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2014). Utpeker seg selv. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2013). Domstolene mellom rett og politikk. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2013). Large and small systems. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  How The Norwegian Supreme Court uses different types of equitable considerations in plenary and grand chamber rulings concerning individual rights versus society's desire, and need, to regulate the conduct and/ or rights of individuals in the time period 1970 to 2010

• Nadim, Morten (2013). Store og små systemer - Utvikling i argumentasjonsmønstre i Høyesterett. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2013). The social role of the Norwegian courts. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2012). Vil ha mildere straffer. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten (2012). Høyesterett i ekspropriasjonssaker 1965-2011. Full text in Research Archive
• Nadim, Morten & Sunde, Jørn Øyrehagen (2017). Precedents in the 21st Century. The Evolution of Case Law in the Norwegian Supreme Court 1970–2016. Universitetet i Bergen. ISSN 9788230839843. Full text in Research Archive

View all works in NVA