Looking for an examination copy?
If you are interested in the title for your course we can consider offering an examination copy. To register your interest please contact email@example.com providing details of the course you are teaching.
The principle of proportionality is currently one of the most discussed topics in the field of comparative constitutional law. Many critics claim that courts use the proportionality test as an instrument of judicial self-empowerment. Proportionality and Judicial Activism tests this hypothesis empirically; it systematically and comparatively analyses the fundamental rights jurisprudence of the Canadian Supreme Court, the German Federal Constitutional Court and the South African Constitutional Court. The book shows that the proportionality test does give judges a considerable amount of discretion. However, this analytical openness does not necessarily lead to judicial activism. Instead, judges are faced with significant institutional constraints, as a result of which all three examined courts refrain from using proportionality for purposes of judicial activism.Read more
- Provides the first systematic empirical analysis of the use of the proportionality test in three constitutional courts, informing the reader on how these courts use proportionality in a comprehensive and comparable analysis
- Offers the first analysis of proportionality jurisprudence of the German Constitutional Court in the English language, enabling non-German readers to review this examination
- Contributes to the discussion on judicial activism through judicial review, providing readers with a focused analysis of specific doctrinal framework and its potential for judicial activism
Not yet reviewed
Be the first to review
Review was not posted due to profanity×
- Date Published: March 2017
- format: Hardback
- isbn: 9781107177987
- dimensions: 236 x 159 x 18 mm
- weight: 0.52kg
- contains: 1 b/w illus.
- availability: Available
Table of Contents
1. Judicial review and the correction of political market failures
2. The normative debate on balancing
3. Balancing and judicial legitimacy
4. Proportionality as a doctrinal construction
5. The avoidance of balancing
6. Rationalising balancing
Conclusion: proportionality and the review of legislative rationality.
Sorry, this resource is locked
Please register or sign in to request access. If you are having problems accessing these resources please email firstname.lastname@example.orgRegister Sign in
You are now leaving the Cambridge University Press website. Your eBook purchase and download will be completed by our partner www.ebooks.com. Please see the permission section of the www.ebooks.com catalogue page for details of the print & copy limits on our eBooks.Continue ×