In 2007 the International Association of Constitutional Law established an Interest Group to conduct a survey of the use of foreign precedents by Supreme and Constitutional Courts. This results of the survey, presented here, gives us the best evidence yet of the existence, and extent, of a transnational constitutional dialogue between courts.
In 2007 the International Association of Constitutional Law established an Interest Group to conduct a survey of the use of foreign precedents by Supreme and Constitutional Courts. This results of the survey, presented here, gives us the best evidence yet of the existence, and extent, of a transnational constitutional dialogue between courts.
Tania Groppi is Professor of Public Law at the University of Siena.Marie-Claire Ponthoreau is Professor of Constitutional Law and Comparative Law at the University of Bordeaux.
Inhaltsangabe
Introduction. The Methodology of the Research: How to Assess the Reality of Transjudicial Communication? Tania Groppi and Marie-Claire Ponthoreau Part I 1. Reference to Foreign Precedents by the Australian High Court: A Matter of Method Cheryl Saunders and Adrienne Stone 2. Canada: Protecting Rights in a 'Worldwide Rights Culture'. An Empirical Study of the Use of Foreign Precedents by the Supreme Court of Canada (1982-2010) Gianluca Gentili 3. India: A 'Critical' Use of Foreign Precedents in Constitutional Adjudication Valentina Rita Scotti 4. The Supreme Court of Ireland and the Use of Foreign Precedents: The Value of Constitutional History Cristina Fasone 5. Israel: Creating a Constitution-The Use of Foreign Precedents by the Supreme Court (1994-2010) Suzie Navot 6. Namibia: The Supreme Court as a Foreign Law Importer Irene Spigno 7. South Africa: Teaching an 'Old Dog' New Tricks? An Empirical Study of the Use of Foreign Precedents by the South African Constitutional Court (1995-2010) Christa Rautenbach Part II 8. Austria: Non-cosmopolitan, but Europe-friendly-The Constitutional Court's Comparative Approach Anna Gamper vi Contents 9. Lifting the Constitutional Curtain? The Use of Foreign Precedent by the German Federal Constitutional Court Stefan Martini 10. Hungary: Unsystematic and Incoherent Borrowing of Law. The Use of Foreign Judicial Precedents in the Jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court, 1999-2010 Zoltán Szente 11. A Gap between the Apparent and Hidden Attitudes of the Supreme Court of Japan towards Foreign Precedents Akiko Ejima 12. Mexico: Struggling for an Open View In Constitutional Adjudication Eduardo Ferrer Mac-Gregor and Rubén Sánchez Gil 13. Romania: Analogical Reasoning as a Dialectical Instrument Elena Simina Tanasescu and Stefan Deaconu 14. Russia: Foreign Transplants in the Russian Constitution and Invisible Foreign Precedents in Decisions of the Russian Constitutional Court Sergey Belov 15. Judges as Discursive Agent: The Use of Foreign Precedents by the Constitutional Court of Taiwan Wen-Chen Chang and Jiunn-Rong Yeh 16. United States of America: First Cautious Attempts of Judicial Use of Foreign Precedents in the Supreme Court's Jurisprudence Angioletta Sperti Conclusion. The Use of Foreign Precedents by Constitutional Judges: A Limited Practice, An Uncertain Future Tania Groppi and Marie-Claire Ponthoreau
Introduction. The Methodology of the Research: How to Assess the Reality of Transjudicial Communication? Tania Groppi and Marie-Claire Ponthoreau Part I 1. Reference to Foreign Precedents by the Australian High Court: A Matter of Method Cheryl Saunders and Adrienne Stone 2. Canada: Protecting Rights in a 'Worldwide Rights Culture'. An Empirical Study of the Use of Foreign Precedents by the Supreme Court of Canada (1982-2010) Gianluca Gentili 3. India: A 'Critical' Use of Foreign Precedents in Constitutional Adjudication Valentina Rita Scotti 4. The Supreme Court of Ireland and the Use of Foreign Precedents: The Value of Constitutional History Cristina Fasone 5. Israel: Creating a Constitution-The Use of Foreign Precedents by the Supreme Court (1994-2010) Suzie Navot 6. Namibia: The Supreme Court as a Foreign Law Importer Irene Spigno 7. South Africa: Teaching an 'Old Dog' New Tricks? An Empirical Study of the Use of Foreign Precedents by the South African Constitutional Court (1995-2010) Christa Rautenbach Part II 8. Austria: Non-cosmopolitan, but Europe-friendly-The Constitutional Court's Comparative Approach Anna Gamper vi Contents 9. Lifting the Constitutional Curtain? The Use of Foreign Precedent by the German Federal Constitutional Court Stefan Martini 10. Hungary: Unsystematic and Incoherent Borrowing of Law. The Use of Foreign Judicial Precedents in the Jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court, 1999-2010 Zoltán Szente 11. A Gap between the Apparent and Hidden Attitudes of the Supreme Court of Japan towards Foreign Precedents Akiko Ejima 12. Mexico: Struggling for an Open View In Constitutional Adjudication Eduardo Ferrer Mac-Gregor and Rubén Sánchez Gil 13. Romania: Analogical Reasoning as a Dialectical Instrument Elena Simina Tanasescu and Stefan Deaconu 14. Russia: Foreign Transplants in the Russian Constitution and Invisible Foreign Precedents in Decisions of the Russian Constitutional Court Sergey Belov 15. Judges as Discursive Agent: The Use of Foreign Precedents by the Constitutional Court of Taiwan Wen-Chen Chang and Jiunn-Rong Yeh 16. United States of America: First Cautious Attempts of Judicial Use of Foreign Precedents in the Supreme Court's Jurisprudence Angioletta Sperti Conclusion. The Use of Foreign Precedents by Constitutional Judges: A Limited Practice, An Uncertain Future Tania Groppi and Marie-Claire Ponthoreau
Es gelten unsere Allgemeinen Geschäftsbedingungen: www.buecher.de/agb
Impressum
www.buecher.de ist ein Internetauftritt der buecher.de internetstores GmbH
Geschäftsführung: Monica Sawhney | Roland Kölbl | Günter Hilger
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Batheyer Straße 115 - 117, 58099 Hagen
Postanschrift: Bürgermeister-Wegele-Str. 12, 86167 Augsburg
Amtsgericht Hagen HRB 13257
Steuernummer: 321/5800/1497
USt-IdNr: DE450055826
