Comparative reasoning in European supreme courts / Michal Bobek.

Format:

Book

Author/Creator:

Bobek, Michal, 1977- author.

Language:

English

Subjects (All):

Courts of last resort--Europe.

Courts of last resort.

Law--Europe--Foreign influences.

Law.

Foreign law, Pleading and proof of--Europe.

Foreign law, Pleading and proof of.

Comparative law.

Physical Description:

1 online resource (713 p.)

Edition:

First edition.

Place of Publication:

[Oxford] : Oxford University Press, [2016]

Language Note:

English

Summary:

The last two decades have witnessed an exponential growth in debates on the use of foreign law by courts. Judges are said to increasingly rely on inspiration from outside of their national legal systems for solving purely domestic cases. This book puts similar claims to the test in relation to the highest national jurisdictions, i.e. supreme and constitutional courts, in Europe today.

Contents:

1.3 Directly Applicable Sources of Public International Law1.4 Law of the European Union; 1.5 Law of the European Convention on Human Rights; 2. Advisable Uses of Foreign Law; 2.1 Reference to a Parent International Law (and to EU Law before Accession); 2.2 Laws Shared with or Taken from Other States; 2.3 General Principles of Law; 2.4 Intra-federal References; 3. Voluntary Uses of Foreign Law; 4. Non-mandatory Uses of Foreign Law and Legal Comparisons; 3. Factors Influencing the Use of Comparative Arguments by Courts; 1. Introduction: Of Abstract Models and Causality; 2. General Factors

2.1 The Political and the Legal2.2 The Size; 2.3 The Age; 3. Institutional Factors; 3.1 Level of the Court in the Judicial Hierarchy; 3.2 Analytical Back-up; 3.3 Points of Reference, Networks, Databases; 4. Procedural Factors; 4.1 Cases Selection; 4.2 Activity of the Parties; 4.3 Amicus curiae; 4.4 Costs of Litigation; 5. Human Factors; 6. Comparisons in Private and in Public Law; 7. Constitutional Adjudication and Human Rights; Part II. The Practice; 4. Prologue: The Method and its Pitfalls; 1. What; 2. How; 3. Potential Inaccuracies; 5. England and Wales; 1. The Doctrine; 1.1 Precedent

1.2 Statutory Interpretation1.3 An Axiomatically Open System; 2. Judicial Views; 2.1 The Judicial Forum; 2.2 Extra-judicial Fora; 3. The Practice; 3.1 The Common Law and the Rest of the World Gap; 3.2 A Glance at the Appellate Committee of the House of Lords in 2009; 3.3 The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom; 4. An Evaluation: A Real Change or Just a Change in Taxonomy?; 4.1 The Unity of the Common Law-from Appeals to Coordination; 4.2 With Whom to Compare?; 4.3 The Voluntary Commonwealth and the Compulsory Europe; 6. France; 1. A Note on the Judicial Style; 2. The Doctrine

2.1 The Exegesis2.2 Gény and the libre recherche scientifique; 2.3 Saleilles and the Search for Objective Judicial Comparisons; 2.4 The Modern Entry Points: Dynamic Interpretation, Standards, and Gaps; 3. Judicial Views; 4. The Practice; 4.1 Indirect Evidence of Comparative Analysis; 4.2 Conseil d'Etat; 4.3 Cour de cassation; 4.4 Conseil constitutionnel; 5. An Evaluation: Comparative Analysis as a Liberalizing Exercise?; 7. Germany; 1. A Note on the Structure of German Federal Jurisdictions; 2. The Doctrine; 2.1 The Comparative Law Debate; 2.2 The General Rechtsdogmatik; 3. Judicial Views

3.1 The Judicial Forum

Notes:

Description based upon print version of record.

Includes bibliographical references and index.

Description based on online resource; title from home page (viewed on April 7, 2016).

Description based on publisher supplied metadata and other sources.

ISBN:

0-19-183349-5

0-19-176028-5

0-19-166999-7

0-19-166998-9

OCLC:

861538472