Deference in International Courts and Tribunals
Standard of Review and Margin of Appreciation
- Publisher's listprice GBP 145.00
-
65 467 Ft (62 350 Ft + 5% VAT)
The price is estimated because at the time of ordering we do not know what conversion rates will apply to HUF / product currency when the book arrives. In case HUF is weaker, the price increases slightly, in case HUF is stronger, the price goes lower slightly.
- Discount 10% (cc. 6 546 Ft off)
- Discounted price 58 921 Ft (56 115 Ft + 5% VAT)
Subcribe now and take benefit of a favourable price.
Subscribe
65 467 Ft
Availability
printed on demand
Why don't you give exact delivery time?
Delivery time is estimated on our previous experiences. We give estimations only, because we order from outside Hungary, and the delivery time mainly depends on how quickly the publisher supplies the book. Faster or slower deliveries both happen, but we do our best to supply as quickly as possible.
Product details:
- Publisher OUP Oxford
- Date of Publication 9 October 2014
- ISBN 9780198716945
- Binding Hardback
- No. of pages464 pages
- Size 240x162x32 mm
- Weight 836 g
- Language English 0
Categories
Short description:
International courts use two key methodologies to determine the degree of deference granted to states in their implementation of international obligations: the standard of review and margin of appreciation. This book investigates how these doctrines are applied in international courts, analysing where their approaches converge and diverge.
MoreLong description:
International courts and tribunals are often asked to review decisions originally made by domestic decision-makers. This can often be a source of tension, as the international courts and tribunals need to judge how far to defer to the original decisions of the national bodies. As international courts and tribunals have proliferated, different courts have applied differing levels of deference to those originial decisions, which can lead to a fragmentation in international law. International courts in such positions rely on two key doctrines: the standard of review and the margin of appreciation. The standard of review establishes the extent to which national decisions relating to factual, legal, or political issues arising in the case are re-examined in the international court. The margin of appreciation is the extent to which national legislative, executive, and judicial decision-makers are allowed to reflect diversity in their interpretation of human rights obligations.
The book begins by providing an overview of the margin of appreciation and standard of review, recognising that while the margin of appreciation explicitly acknowledges the existence of such deference, the standard of review does not: it is rather a procedural mechanism. It looks in-depth at how the public policy exception has been assessed by the European Court of Justice and the WTO dispute settlement bodies. It examines how the European Court of Human Rights has taken an evidence-based approach towards the margin of appreciation, as well as how it has addressed issues of hate speech. The Inter-American system is also investigated, and it is established how far deference is possible within that legal organisation. Finally, the book studies how a range of other international courts, such as the International Criminal Court, and the Law of the Sea Tribunal, have approached these two core doctrines.
This book contains a diverse collection of essays dealing with the fascinating issue of deference in international courts and tribunals... Gruszczynski and Werner's book provides a welcome and commendable contribution to the issue of judicial deference in international law generally, i.e. beyond the familiar fields of human rights and trade law.
Table of Contents:
Introduction
Part I: General issues/comparative perspectives
Judicial standards of review and administration of justice in trade and investment law and adjudication
Deference and the use of the public policy exception in international courts
Democracy and distrust in international law: The procedural democracy doctrine and the standard of review used by international courts and tribunals
Good faith review
Part II: International investment law and WTO law
Beyond the standard of review: Deference criteria in WTO law and the case for procedural approach
The role of the standard of review and the importance of deference in investor-state arbitration
Treaty change, arbitral practice and the search for a balance: Standards of review and the margin of appreciation in international investment law
Standard of review and scientific evidence in WTO law and international investment arbitration: Converging parallels?
Part III: European Union law
National procedural choices before the Court of Justice of the European Union
Risk, precaution and scientific complexity before the Court of Justice of the European Union
Standard of review for necessity and proportionality analysis in EU and WTO law: Why differences in standards of review are legitimate?
Part IV: International human rights law
1. The European Court of Human Rights and standards of proof: An evidential approach toward the margin of appreciation
Experts in hate speech cases: Towards a higher standard of proof in Strasbourg?
The standard of equivalent protection as a standard of review
Subsidiarity in the Americas: what room is there for deference in the Inter-American System?
Part V: Other international courts
Standard of review and the margin of appreciation before the International Court of Justice
Standard of review and the International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea
Deference in the International Criminal Court practice concerning admissibility challenges lodged by States
Beyond hierarchy: Standards of review and complementarity of the International Criminal Court
