Judicial Bricolage
The Use of Foreign Precedents by Constitutional Judges in the 21st Century
Sorozatcím: Hart Studies in Comparative Public Law;
-
10% KEDVEZMÉNY?
- A kedvezmény csak az 'Értesítés a kedvenc témákról' hírlevelünk címzettjeinek rendeléseire érvényes.
- Kiadói listaár GBP 150.00
-
71 662 Ft (68 250 Ft + 5% áfa)
Az ár azért becsült, mert a rendelés pillanatában nem lehet pontosan tudni, hogy a beérkezéskor milyen lesz a forint árfolyama az adott termék eredeti devizájához képest. Ha a forint romlana, kissé többet, ha javulna, kissé kevesebbet kell majd fizetnie.
- Kedvezmény(ek) 10% (cc. 7 166 Ft off)
- Kedvezményes ár 64 496 Ft (61 425 Ft + 5% áfa)
Iratkozzon fel most és részesüljön kedvezőbb árainkból!
Feliratkozom
71 662 Ft
Beszerezhetőség
Készleten van irodánkban, így nagyon gyorsan eljuthat Önhöz. Rendelje meg most online, és szinte azonnal szállítunk vagy akkortól átvehető nálunk munkaidőben. 5 munkanapja van az átvételre visszajelző emailünk után.
Készletünk: 1 példány
A termék adatai:
- Kiadó Hart Publishing
- Megjelenés dátuma 2025. február 20.
- Kötetek száma Hardback
- ISBN 9781509973996
- Kötéstípus Keménykötés
- Terjedelem oldal
- Méret 164x236x50 mm
- Súly 1300 g
- Nyelv angol 749
Kategóriák
Rövid leírás:
The book presents an in-depth examination of the quantitative and qualitative use of foreign precedents by constitutional judges in 31 countries, across 5 continents, during the period 2011-2021.
TöbbHosszú leírás:
This book represents a unique contribution to comparative legal studies by presenting the results of an empirical research project on the use of foreign precedents in constitutional interpretation in 31 jurisdictions worldwide.
It expands and updates the outcomes presented in the previous successful book The Use of Foreign Precedents by Constitutional Judges, edited by Tania Groppi and Marie-Claire Ponthoreau and published in 2013 as Volume 1 of the series Hart Studies in Comparative Public Law.
This new research, covering countries from all the continents, with special attention to some of the emerging jurisdictions of the Global South, confirms that the practice of making explicit use of foreign precedents is still limited both quantitatively and qualitatively. Judicial dialogue only exists in common law jurisdictions and, even there, 'judicial bricolage' is much more common than 'judicial comparativism'. Since the previous edition, this practice has gone hand in hand with new developments in constitutional law, such as the democratic erosion and backsliding, the emergence of populist movements, the increasing role of regional human rights courts, which in many cases overshadowed foreign sources, and the end of a global vision of constitutionalism.
Applying a quantitative and a qualitative analysis, with the support of tables and data, the book gives a more complete picture of the practice of citing foreign precedents in this new and challenging era, resulting in essential reading for comparative and constitutional legal scholars.
Tartalomjegyzék:
Introduction: Assessing the Use of Foreign Precedents by Constitutional Justices: Ten Years Later
Tania Groppi (University of Siena, Italy), Marie-Claire Ponthoreau (University of Bordeaux, France) and Irene Spigno (Autonomous University of Coahuila, Mexico)
Part I: The 'Usual Suspects': Engagement with Foreign Precedents in Common Law Courts
1. An Ongoing Engagement: The Australian High Court and Foreign Case Law
Elisa Arcioni (University of Sydney Law School, Australia) and Jeffrey Gordon (University of Sydney, Australia)
2. Turbulent Resistance in the Supreme Court of Canada: An Unexpected Backlash Against the Use of Foreign Precedents in Constitutional Interpretation
Lise Brun (University Laval, Canada)
3. India: Using Foreign Precedents to Understand Her Own Constitutional Identity
Antonin Vergnes (University of Bordeaux, France)
4. The Use of Foreign Precedents in the Irish Supreme Court's Constitutional Case Law: An Update
Cristina Fasone (LUISS University, Italy)
5. The Use of Comparative Law as a Source of Legitimacy for the New Kenyan Judiciary: The Case of the Supreme Court of Kenya
Evelyne Asaala (University of Nairobi, Kenya) and Nicoletta Perlo (University of Burgandy, France)
6. The Use of Foreign Precedents in Malaysian Federal Court: Between Engagement and Restraint
Faridah Jalil (University Kebangsaan Malaysia)
7. The Use of Foreign Constitutional Precedents in Singapore: The Paramountcy of Local Context
Maartje de Visser (Singapore Management University)
8. The Use of Foreign Precedents by the South African Constitutional Court Judges: Has Anything Changed?
Christa Rautenbach (North-West University, South Africa)
Part II: In Between: Limited and Selective Reference to Foreign Precedents Worldwide
A. Rehearsal of Engagement: Recent Developments in Some Reticent Courts
9. Using Foreign Precedents to Meet the European Standards: The Case of the Constitutional Court of Albania
Aurela Anastasi (University of Tirana, Albania)
10. Keep Calm and Carry on Comparing (More) Professionally: The Use of Foreign Precedent by the German Federal Constitutional Court in the 2010s
Stefan Martini (University of Kiel, Germany)
11. The Use of Foreign Precedents in a Hybrid Legal Order: The Case of Liechtenstein
Peter Bußjäger (University of Innsbruck, Austria)
12. Flirting with Foreign Precedents at the Constitutional Court of Slovenia
Tilen Stajnpihler Bozic (University of Ljubljana, Slovenia) and Samo Bardutzki (University of Ljubljana, Slovenia)
13. The Escalating Use of Foreign Precedents by Individual Justices in Taiwan's Constitutional Court
Wen-Chen Chang (National Taiwan University) and Shao-Man Lee (National Cheng Kung University, Taiwan)
B. Lost in the Shuffle: The Use of Foreign Precedents in South American Courts
14. The Use of Foreign Precedents by the Brazilian Supreme Federal Court: Paving the Way for Democracy with a Broad Comparative Approach
Manuellita Hermes (University of Brazil)
15. Importing Legitimacy, Getting Adjudicative Leeway: The Use of Foreign Precedents by the Chilean Constitutional Tribunal
Cristián Villalonga (Pontifical Catholic University of Chile) and Johanna Fröhlich (Pontifi cal Catholic University of Chile)
16. The Limited but Significant Use of Foreign Precedents by the Colombian Constitutional Court
Magdalena Correa Henao (Externado University, Colombia) and Iván Otero Suárez (Externado University, Colombia)
17. Fixing a Troubled Relationship: The Use of Foreign Precedents in the Constitutional Court of Ecuador
Daniela Salazar Marín (Universidad San Francisco de Quito, Ecuador) and Roberto Eguiguren Calisto (Universidad San Francisco de Quito, Ecuador)
C. From Reticent to Selective: The Vast Group of Strategists Courts
18. The Use of Foreign Precedents in Austria: Continuing the Use of Non-Use
Anna Gamper (University of Innsbruck, Austria)
19. The Use of Foreign Precedents by the Constitutional Court of Georgia: Explicit Citations and Careful Restraint
Malkhaz Nakashidze (Batumi Shota Rustaveli State University, Georgia)
20. Constant Inconsistency: The Use of Foreign Precedents in Hungarian Constitutional Jurisprudence
Zoltán Szente (Legal Studies of the Centre for Social Sciences in Budapest, Hungary) and Fruzsina Gárdos-Orosz (Social Sciences of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences)
21. The Use of Foreign Precedents by the Italian Constitutional Court: Something New under the Sun?
Anna Maria Lecis Cocco Ortu (Political Studies Institute Sciences Po Bordeaux, France)
22. Still Residual Mention of Foreign Precedents by the Polish Constitutional Tribunal: No Need or Intention?
Anna Michalak (University of Lodz, Poland)
23. The Sparse and Strategic Use of Foreign Precedents by the Constitutional Court of Romania
Ramona-Delia Popescu (University of Bucharest, Romania) and Elena Simina Tanasescu (University of Bucharest, Romania)
24. The Constitutional Court of Korea: Institutionalised Focus on Three Foreign Jurisdictions
Soojin Kong (Constitutional Court of Korea) and Fabian Duessel (Constitutional Court of Korea)
25. Switzerland: A Migration of Constitutional Ideas? An Empirical Study of the Use of Foreign Precedents by the Swiss Federal Tribunal
Micol Ferrario (Bocconi University, Italy)
Part III: Reluctance: Nationalist Courts
26. Foreign Precedents in the Belgian Constitutional Court Case Law: Report on their Tacit Influence, or How to Play Hide and Seek
Anaïs Brucher (UCLouvain, Belgium) and Marc Verdussen (UCLouvain, Belgium)
27. The Use of Foreign Precedents by the French Conseil Constitutionnel: A Hidden and Marginal Influence
Alexis Le Quinio (University of Limoges, France)
28. The Use of Foreign Precedents by the Supreme Court of Japan: Awakening?
Akiko Ejima (Meiji University, Japan)
29. The One and Only Explicit Use of Foreign Precedents by the Russian Constitutional Court Since 2010
Sergei Belov (St Petersburg State University, Russia)
30. The Reluctant Court. An Analysis of the Use of Foreign Precedents by the Constitutional Court of Turkey
Valentina Rita Scotti (European Public Law Organization, Greece) and Oya Boyar (Marmara University, Turkey)
31. United States of America: Confirming the Supreme Court's Cautious Approach in the Use of Foreign Precedents
Rachele Bizzari (University of Pisa, Italy) and Angioletta Sperti (University of Pisa, Italy)
Conclusion: The Use of Foreign Precedents by Constitutional Judges: Still a Limited Practice in a Competitive Legal World
Tania Groppi (University of Siena, Italy), Marie-Claire Ponthoreau (University of Bordeaux, France) and Irene Spigno (Autonomous University of Coahuila, Mexico)
