The idea of landmark cases is ubiquitous in legal scholarship and adjudication. Both scholars who rely on ‘landmark’ cases and those who avoid the label often focus too much attention on a small sample of individual cases when researching legal doctrine. This risks missing important cases and pieces of the doctrinal picture. The article proposes an updated methodology that returns ‘to the basics’ of doctrinal scholarship, but with an empirical twist enabled through modern database technology. The approach is exemplified through the case study of López Ostra v Spain, a well-known environmental human rights decision under the European Convention on Human Rights. Based on a comprehensive data set of all environmental decisions, the article argues that the ‘landmark’ status of López Ostra is less empirically and doctrinally clear than conventionally accepted in legal scholarship.

中文翻译：

---

挖掘地标-对理论分析的经验性贡献

具有里程碑意义的案件的想法在法律学术和裁决中无处不在。在研究法律学说时，无论是依靠“地标”案件的学者还是那些避免使用“地标”案件的学者，都经常将注意力集中在一小部分个别案件上。这冒着遗漏重要案件和教义图景的风险。本文提出了一种更新的方法论，该方法论返回了“学问学的基础知识”，但通过现代数据库技术实现了经验上的转变。该方法以LópezOstra诉西班牙一案为例，这是《欧洲人权公约》下一项著名的环境人权裁决。基于所有环境决策的综合数据集，文章认为洛佩兹·奥斯特拉（LópezOstra）的“地标”地位 在法律上和学术上比常规接​​受的缺乏经验和理论上的清晰。