Reasoning Rights: Comparative Judicial EngagementLiora Lazarus, Christopher McCrudden, Nigel Bowles Bloomsbury Publishing, 2014 M12 1 - 382 páginas This book is about judicial reasoning in human rights cases. The aim is to explore the question: how is it that notionally universal norms are reasoned by courts in such significantly different ways? What is the shape of this reasoning; which techniques are common across the transnational jurisprudence; and which are particular? The book, comprising contributions by a team of world-leading human rights scholars, moves beyond simply addressing the institutional questions concerning courts and human rights, which often dominate discussions of this kind, seeking instead a deeper examination of the similarities and divergence of reasonings by different courts when addressing comparable human rights questions. These differences, while partly influenced by institutional concerns, cannot be attributed to them alone. This book explores the diverse and rich underlying spectrum of human rights reasoning, as a distinctive and particular form of legal reasoning, evident in the case studies across the selected jurisdictions. |
Contenido
| 1965 | |
Why Judicial Ad | |
Proportionality in United States Constitutional | |
Secret Evidence | |
A Comparative Analysis | |
The Diverse Forms of Social Rights Review | |
The Case for Diversity in Social Rights Review | |
Conclusion | |
A South African Perspective on the Judicial Development of SocioEconomic Rights Edwin Cameron I Introduction | |
Objections to SocioEconomic Rights | |
Setting the Standard for Judicial Review | |
Critical Analysis of the Constitutional Courts Approach to SocioEconomic Rights | |
Crafting Appropriate Remedies in SocioEconomic Rights Cases | |
Judges Security Detentions and Secret | |
The Intersection of Religious Autonomy and Religious | |
Religious Freedom in a Time | |
State Interference in the Internal Affairs of Religious | |
The Emergence and Enforcement of SocioEconomic Rights | |
The Problematic of Social Rights Uniformity and Diversity | |
Questionable Legitimacy of the Orthodox Position | |
The Social Rights Problematic | |
The South African Approach in Comparative Perspective | |
Lessons for Other Jurisdictions | |
Lessons for Economic and Social Rights Adjudication Anashri Pillay I Introduction II Directive Principles of State Policy Land Reform and the Judici... | |
Making Directive Principles of State Policy Justiciable | |
Judicial Activism Curtailed? | |
Lessons from the Indian Experience of Economic and Social Rights Adjudication | |
Conclusion | |
Otras ediciones - Ver todas
Reasoning Rights: Comparative Judicial Engagement Liora Lazarus,Christopher McCrudden,Nigel Bowles Vista previa limitada - 2014 |
Reasoning Rights: Comparative Judicial Engagement Liora Lazarus,Christopher McCrudden,Nigel Bowles Sin vista previa disponible - 2016 |
Reasoning Rights: Comparative Judicial Engagement Liora Lazarus,Christopher McCrudden,Nigel Bowles Sin vista previa disponible - 2014 |
Términos y frases comunes
adopted alternative applied approach argued Australia Bilchitz Binyam Mohamed Canada chapter Church cleared counsel considered Constitutional Court Constitutional Law constitutional rights constitutionally context Court of Human decision detainee disclosure discrimination economic rights ECtHR effective EHRR European Court example extraordinary rendition F 3d freedom of religion fundamental rights German Constitutional Court hoc balancing human rights adjudication human rights law ibid individual infringement International interpretation involved Israel Israeli Israeli Supreme Court issue Journal judges judgment judicial review jurisdictions jurisprudence Law Review lawyers legislation limited litigation Lochner measure national security necessity enquiry open justice Oxford particular political principle procedural proportionality inquiry proportionality test protection realise reasoning religion religious institutions role scrutiny secret evidence social rights review socio-economic rights South African Constitutional special advocate sphere sovereignty strict scrutiny Supreme Court Union of India United Kingdom Unlawful Combatants violation