Perceived from the inside, the problem appears to be one of performance of individual judges, increasing workloads, limited means, bad legislation, and increasing expertise at the bar. Couched in these terms, the problem is insoluble for the judiciary, due to the external nature of most of these factors. Perceived from the outside, however, a different picture emerges. Statistics show decreasing productivity by the judiciary. The resulting bottlenecks in the administration of justice tend to be solved by a progressive marginalization of the judiciary, which results in a loss of effective control over social and legal developments. This article argues that an assessment of the function of the judiciary should start with a clear perception of its function in society. Functional requirements, like judicial independence and legal proficiency, have tended to become the benchmarks of judicial quality, whereas the primary function of the judiciary is to put an effective end to social disputes and to promote a coherent legal and social order. The debate on judicial quality should therefore primarily be directed toward improving the capacity of the judiciary in this respect.