Skip to main content
×
Home
Procedural Review in European Fundamental Rights Cases
  • Export citation
  • Recommend to librarian
  • Recommend this book

    Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this book to your organisation's collection.

    Procedural Review in European Fundamental Rights Cases
    • Online ISBN: 9781316874844
    • Book DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316874844
    Please enter your name
    Please enter a valid email address
    Who would you like to send this to? *
    ×
  • Buy the print book

Book description

Traditionally, courts adjudicate fundamental rights cases by applying substantive tests of reasonableness or proportionality. Increasingly, however, European courts are also expressly taking account of the quality of the procedure that has led up to a fundamental rights interference. Yet this procedural review is far from uncontroversial. There still is a lack of clarity as to what 'procedural review' really means, what its potential for judicial decision-making is, how it relates and should relate to substantive review, and what its limitations are. Featuring contributions from experts in the field, this book is the first in-depth study into procedural review, considering the theoretical and conceptual issues at play, as well as the applicability of procedural review in different legal systems. It will therefore be of great importance to scholars and practitioners interested in fundamental rights adjudication in Europe, judicial reasoning and procedural justice.

    • Aa
    • Aa
Refine List
Actions for selected content:
Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Send to Kindle
  • Send to Dropbox
  • Send to Google Drive
  • Send content to

    To send content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about sending content to .

    To send content to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

    Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

    Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

    Please be advised that item(s) you selected are not available.
    You are about to send:
    ×

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
×

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.


D. Grimm , ‘Proportionality in Canadian and German Constitutional Jurisprudence’, 57 University of Toronto Law Journal (2007) pp. 383397

L. Tribe , ‘The Puzzling Persistence of Process-Based Constitutional Theories’, 89 Yale Law Journal (1980) p. 1063

L. Lusky , ‘Footnote Redux: A Carolene Products Reminiscence’, 82 Columbia Law Review (1982), p. 1093

B. Ackerman , ‘Beyond Carolene Products’, 98 Harvard Law Review (1985), p. 713

A.L. Young , ‘In Defence of Due Deference’, 72 Modern Law Review (2009) pp. 554580

J.H. Gerards , ‘The Prism of Fundamental Rights’, 8 European Constitutional Law Review 2012 (2) pp. 173202

I. Bar-Siman-Tov , ‘Semiprocedural Judicial Review6 Legisprudence (2012) p. 271

A Kavanagh , ‘Proportionality and Parliamentary Debates: Exploring Some Forbidden Territory’, 34 Oxford Journal of Legal Studies (2014) (3) pp. 443479

P. Popelier and C. Van de Heyning , ‘Procedural Rationality: Giving Teeth to the Proportionality Analysis’, 9 European Constitutional Law Review (2013) pp. 230262

E. Brems & L. Lavrysen (2013), ‘Procedural Justice in Human Rights Adjudication: The European Court of Human Rights’, 35 Human Rights Quarterly 2013, p. 176200

E. Brems , ‘Procedural Protection: An Examination of Procedural Safeguards Read into Substantive Convention Rights’, in E. Brems and J.H. Gerards (eds), Shaping Rights in the ECHR. The Role of the European Court of Human Rights in Determining the Scope of Human Rights (Cambridge University Press, 2013) pp. 137161

E. Brems and L. Lavrysen , ‘Procedural Justice in Human Rights Adjudication: The European Court of Human Rights’, 35 Human Rights Quarterly (2013) pp. 176200

Eva Brems , ‘Procedural Protection: An Examination of Procedural Safeguards Read into Substantive Convention Rights’, in Eva Brems and Janneke Gerards (eds), Shaping Rights in the ECHR; The Role of the European Court of Human Rights in Determining the Scope of Human Rights, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013, pp. 137161

Amy Gangl , ‘Procedural Justice Theory and Evaluations of the Lawmaking Process’, Political Behavior, 25, 2 (2003)

Margaret Levi , Audrey Sacks and Tom Tyler , ‘Conceptualizing Legitimacy, Measuring Legitimating Beliefs’, American Behavioral Scientist 53(3) (2009). p. 360

Tom Tyler , ‘What Is Procedural Justice?: Criteria Used by Citizens to Assess the Fairness of Legal Procedures’, Law and Society Review, 22 (1988), p. 129

Tom Tyler , ‘Governing Amid Diversity: Can Fair Decision-Making Procedures Bridge Competing Public Interests and Values?’, Law and Society Review, 28, (1994), p. 824

A. Sathanapally , Beyond Disagreement: Open Remedies in Human Rights Adjudication (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012)

A. Sen , ‘Elements of a Theory of Human Rights’ (2004) 32 Philosophy and Public Affairs 315, 322323

S. Benhabib , The Rights of Others (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004)

C. Cerna , ‘Universality of Human Rights and Cultural Diversity: Implementation of Human Rights in Different Socio-Cultural Contexts’ (1994) 16(4) Human Rights Quarterly pp. 740752

C. Harlow , ‘Global Administrative Law: The Quest for Principles and Values’ (2006) 17 European Journal of International Law, pp. 187214

M. Shapiro , ‘The Institutionalisation of European Administrative Space’ in A. Stone Sweet et al. (eds), The Institutionalization of Europe (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001)

I. Bar-Siman-Tov , ‘Semiprocedural Judicial Review6 Legisprudence (2012), p. 271

J. Waldron , Law and Disagreement (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999)

A. Tomkins et al. (eds), Sceptical Essays on Human Rights (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001)

A. Tomkins et al. (eds), The Legal Protection of Human Rights: Sceptical Essays (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011)

J.L. Mashaw Between Facts and Norms: Agency Statutory Interpretation as an Autonomous Enterprise’ (2005) 55 University of Toronto Law Journal, p. 497

L.L. Fuller , ‘The Forms and Limits of Adjudication’ (1978) 92 Harvard Law Review 353

J.W.F. Allison , ‘Fuller’s Analysis of Polycentric Disputes and the Limits of Adjudication’ (1994) 53(2) Cambridge Law Journal, pp. 367383

A. Kavanagh , ‘Deference or Defiance? The Limits of the Judicial Role in Constitutional Adjudication’ in G. Huscroft (ed) Expounding the Constitution: Essays in Constitutional Theory (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008), pp. 184215

J. King , ‘Institutional Approaches to Judicial Restraint’ (2008) 28 OJLS, pp. 409441

D. Dyzenhaus , ‘Proportionality and Deference in a Culture of Justification’ in G. Huscroft et al. (eds), Proportionality and the Rule of Law: Rights, Justification, Reasoning (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014), 234

C. Sunstein , ‘Beyond the Republican Revival’ (1988) 97 Yale Law Journal, p. 1539

M. Cohen-Eliya and I. Porat , ‘Proportionality and the Culture of Justification’ (2010) 59 American Journal of Comparative Law 463, pp. 466467

J. Hiebert , ‘Interpreting a Bill of Rights: The Importance of Legislative Rights Review’ (2005) 35 British Journal of Political Science, pp. 235255

M. Shapiro and A. Stone Sweet , On Law, Politics and Judicialization (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002)

A. Stone Sweet and H. Keller (eds), A Europe of Rights: The Impact of the ECHR on National Legal Systems (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008)

N. Krisch , ‘The Open Architecture of European Human Rights Law’ (2008) 71 Modern Law Review 183, pp. 206210

T. Poole , ‘The Reformation of English Administrative Law’ (2009) 68 Cambridge Law Journal 142, pp.154155

A. Kavanagh , ‘Proportionality and Parliamentary Debates: Exploring Forbidden Territory’ (2014) 34 Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, p. 443

I. Bar-Siman-Tov , ‘Semiprocedural Judicial Review’, Legisprudence, 6 (2012), 271

W. Vandenbruwaene , ‘Multi-Tiered Political Questions: The ECJ’s Mandate in Enforcing Subsidiarity’, Legisprudence, 6 (2012), pp. 336343

C.M. Radaelli , ‘Diffusion without Convergence: How Political Context Shapes the Adoption of Regulatory Impact Assessment’, Journal of European Public Policy, 12 (2005), 924943

K. Messerschmidt , ‘The Race to Rationality Review and the Score of the German Federal Constitutional Court’, 6 Legisprudence, 6 (2012), 359

F. De Francesco , ‘Diffusion of Regulatory Impact Analysis Among OECD and EU member states’, Comparative Political Studies, 45 (2012), pp. 13, 14, 19, 21

J. Andeweg , ‘Consociational Democracy’, Annual Review of Political Science, 3 (2000), p. 510

D. Spielmann , ‘Allowing the Right Margin: The European Court of Human Rights and the National Margin of Appreciation Doctrine: Waiver or Subsidiarity of European Review?’, Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies, 14 (2011–2012) p. 381

J. Gerards , ‘The Prism of Fundamental Rights’, (2012) 8 European Constitutional Law Review, pp. 173202, at p. 196

J.L. Miller , ‘A New “Democratic Life” for the European Union? Administrative lawmaking, democratic legitimacy and the Lisbon Treaty’, (2011) 17 Contemporary Politics, pp. 321334, at p. 323

J. Greenwood , ‘Organized Civil Society and Democratic Legitimacy in the European Union’, (2007) 37 British Journal of Political Science, pp. 333357, at p. 334

T. Persson , ‘Democratizing European Chemicals Policy: Do Consultations Favour Civil Society Participation?’, (2008) 3 Journal of Civil Society, pp. 223238, at p. 225

E. Darian-Smith and C. Scott , ‘Regulation and Human Rights in Socio-Legal Scholarship’, 31 (2009) Law & Policy, pp. 271281, at pp. 271, 272

H. Xanthaki , ‘European Union Legislative Quality after the Lisbon Treaty: The Challenges of Smart Regulation’ (2013) 35 Statute Law Review, pp. 6680, at p. 76

A.C.M. Meuwese and S. Gomtsian , ‘Regulatory Scrutiny of Subsidiarity and Proportionality’, (2015) 22 Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law, pp. 483505, at p. 486

A. Alemanno , ‘The Better Regulation Initiative at the Judicial Gate: A Trojan Horse within the Commission’s Walls or the Way Forward?’ (2009) 15 European Law Journal pp. 382400, at p. 389

M. Souto-Otero , ‘Is Better Regulation Possible? Formal and Substantive Quality in the Impact Assessments in Education and Culture of the European Commission’, (2013) 9 Evidence & Policy, pp. 513529

M.-H. Maras , ‘The Economic Costs and Consequences of Mass Communications Data Retention: Is the Data Retention Directive a Proportionate Measure?’ (2012) 33 European Journal of Law and Economics, pp. 447452, at p. 450

E. Kosta and P. Valcke , ‘Retaining the Data Retention Directive’, Computer Law & Security Report 22 (2006), pp. 379380

M. Bauer , ‘Limitations to Agency Control in European Union Policy-Making: The Commission and the Poverty Programmes’ (2002) 40 Journal of Common Market Studies, p. 389

J.P. Cross , ‘Striking a Pose: Transparency and Position Taking in the Council of the European Union’, 52 (2013) European Journal of Political Research, pp. 291315, at, pp. 293294

M. Souto-Otero , ‘Is Better Regulation Possible? Formal and Substantive Quality in the Impact Assessments in Education and Culture of the European Commission’, (2013) 9 Evidence & Policy, pp. 513529, at p. 521

R. Schütze , ‘Delegated Legislation in the (New) European Union: A Constitutional Analysis’ (2011), 74 Modern Law Review, pp. 661693, at p. 681

K. Lenaerts , ‘The European Court of Justice and Process-Oriented Review’, 31 (2012) Yearbook of European Law, pp. 316, at p. 3

P. Popelier and C. Van de Heyning , ‘Procedural Rationality: Giving Teeth to the Proportionality Analysis’, 9 European Constitutional Law Review (2013) pp. 230262

A. Kavanagh , ‘Proportionality and Parliamentary Debates: Exploring Some Forbidden Territory’, 34 Oxford Journal of Legal Studies (2014) pp. 443479

R. Spano , ‘Universality or Diversity of Human Rights? Strasbourg in the Age of Subsidiarity’, 14 Human Rights Law Review (2014) pp. 487502 at p. 498

E. Brems and L. Lavrysen , ‘Procedural Justice in Human Rights Adjudication: The European Court of Human Rights’, 35 Human Rights Quarterly (2013) pp. 176200

D. Kosař , ‘Policing Separation of Powers: A New Role for the European Court of Human Rights?’, 8 European Constitutional Law Review (2012) pp. 3362

H.M. ten Napel , ‘The European Court of Human Rights and Political Rights: The Need for More Guidance’, 5 European Constitutional Law Review (2009) pp. 464480

J. Bomhoff and L. Zucca , ‘The Tragedy of Ms Evans: Conflicts and Incommensurability of Rights’, 2 European Constitutional Law Review (2006) p. 424 at pp. 429430

T. Lewis , ‘Animal Defenders International v. United Kingdom: Sensible Dialogue or a Bad Case of Strasbourg Jitters?’, 77 Modern Law Review (2014) pp. 460492 at p. 468

E. Bjorge , ‘National Supreme Courts and the Development of ECHR Rights’, 9 International Journal of Constitutional Law (2011) pp. 531

S. Prechal and R. Widdershoven , ‘Redefining the Relationship between “Rewe-effectiveness” and Effective Judicial Protection’, (2011) 4 Review of European Administrative Law 2011, pp. 3150

S. de Vries , ‘Balancing Fundamental Rights with Economic Freedoms According to the European Court of Justice’, (2013) 9 Utrecht Law Review, p. 174

J. Gerards , ‘Pluralism, Deference and the Margin of Appreciation Doctrine’ (2011) 17 European Law Journal, pp. 8587

H. Hofman and B. Mihaescu , ‘The Relation between the Charter’s Fundamental Rights and the Unwritten General Principles of EU Law: Good Administration as the Test Case’ (2013) 9 European Constitutional Law Review, pp. 73101

E. Brems and L. Lavrysen , ‘Procedural justice in human rights adjudication: the European Court of Human Rights’ (2013) 35 Human Rights Quarterly, pp. 198199

M. Wimmer , ‘Inward- and Outward-Looking Rationales behind Kadi II’ (2014) 21 Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law, pp. 676703

P. Popelier , ‘Preliminary Comments on the Role of Courts as Regulatory Watchdogs’, (2012) 6 Legisprudence, pp. 261262

E. Brems , ‘Procedural Protection: An Examination of Procedural Safeguards Read into Substantive Convention Rights’, in E Brems and J.H. Gerards (eds), Shaping Rights in the ECHR (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013), pp. 137161

G. de Búrca , ‘The Principle of Proportionality and Its Application in EC Law’, (1993) 13 Yearbook of European Law, p. 146

N. Lockhart and E. Shearhold , ‘In Search of Relevant Discretion: The Role of the Mandatory/Discretionary Distinction in WTO LawJournal of International Economic Law, 13(2) (2011) p. 379

P. Ala’i , ‘From the Periphery to the Center? The Evolving WTO Jurisprudence on Transparency and Good Governance’, Journal of International Economic Law, 11(4) (2008), p. 779

I. Van Damme , ‘The Function of Interpretation in the WTO’, European Journal of International Law, 21(3) (2010), p. 605

A. Lang and J. Scott , ‘The Hidden World of WTO Governance’, European Journal of International Law, 20(3) (2009), p. 575

I. Van Damme , Treaty Interpretation by the WTO Appellate Body (Oxford University Press, 2009)

L.H. Tribe , ‘The Puzzling Persistence of Process-Based Constitutional Theories’, Yale Law Journal 89 (1980), p. 1063, at p. 1065

F. Ahmed and A. Perry , ‘The Coherence of the Doctrine of Legitimate Expectations’ (2014) 73 C.L.J. 61)

R. Masterman , ‘Deconstructing the Mirror Principle’ in R. Masterman and I. Leigh (eds), The United Kingdom’s Statutory Bill of Rights: Constitutional and Comparative Perspectives (183 Proceedings of the British Academy) (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013)

R. Masterman , ‘Aspiration or Foundation? The Status of the Strasbourg Jurisprudence and the Convention Rights in Domestic Law’ in H. Fenwick , G. Phillipson and R. Masterman (eds), Judicial Reasoning after the Human Rights Act (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007)

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 2
Total number of PDF views: 130 *
Loading metrics...

Book summary page views

Total views: 221 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 13th April 2017 - 23rd June 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.