This chapter summarizes the empirical findings by comparing the three international courts. It shows that the EACJ has been the most deferential of the three courts, followed by the CCJ, and the African Court has been the least deferential. At the same time, the EACJ has the narrowest strategic space, the African Court the broadest and the CCJ lies between. The comparative analysis corroborates the theoretical argument of the book as each court’s deference closely aligns with its degree of formal independence and the extent of political fragmentation among its member states. The chapter revisits the book’s core argument by discussing the scope of the argument and considering its generalizability. It concludes with a discussion of the book’s implications for interdisciplinary research on international courts and IR literature on IOs in contemporary world politics.

Fashion upcycling offers unprecedented opportunities for the sustainable reuse of clothing: using second-hand garments as raw materials for new creations, upcyclers can transform used pieces of clothing into new fashion products that may become even more sought-after than the source material. Considering the overarching policy objective to ensure a circular economy, the use of trademark-protected fashion elements for upcycling purpose can be qualified as a particularly important form of artistic expression. The reference to products of the original trademark owner is made for the socially valuable purpose of providing a vision of better, more sustainable production and consumption practices.

The introduction presents the aim and themes of the book within its historiographical framework. It accounts for the relative obscurity of local priests in historical research on the period by examining their role in three influential historiographical approaches and explains the way in which the study of this group of clergymen can improve our understanding of the tenth and early eleventh centuries. As well as setting out the structure of the rest of the book, this introduction provides an overview of the sources examined in the following chapters and briefly discusses the study’s geographical scope.

This chapter looks at moments when local priests came together. It focuses on the diocesan synod, the regular meeting which in theory all priests in the diocese were supposed to attend. Drawing on different kinds of evidence, including liturgies, charters, sermons, hagiography and poems, it argues that local priests attended these meetings more frequently than has been supposed, and examines what sort of things they might have learned and experienced at the synod. It argues for a change in the nature of the diocesan synod from the year 1000, as the occasion became more ceremonial, perhaps as part of episcopal strategies of representation, but perhaps also simply in response to the rising numbers of attendees, as the Church network continued to expand and consolidate.

This chapter examines the evolution of freedom of expression doctrines in the context of digital media. It focuses on how the European Court of Human Rights has adapted traditional doctrines, rooted in Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, to address challenges in the new media environment. The authors explore how freedom of expression, vital to democracy, must balance individual rights, societal interests, and the regulation of disinformation and hate speech in the digital age. The Court’s defence of democracy has evolved from responding to authoritarian threats in Europe’s past to addressing new risks in the digital realm. Principles such as proportionality, the prohibition of abuse of rights (Article 17), and preventing the misuse of democratic freedoms (Article 18) guide limitations on expression, ensuring they are justified and not misused for political suppression. Social media has expanded the concept of ‘public watchdogs’ beyond traditional media to include non-governmental organisations, bloggers, and activists. This evolution demands rethinking the liability and freedom of expression doctrines for platforms.

This chapter provides an overview of contemporary technological transformations and their implications for labour, particularly in the Brazilian context. The advancement of digitalisation and the platformisation of labour has intensified precarisation and social inequalities, with ‘uberisation’ and the gig economy emerging as symbols of this new landscape. Algorithmic management, the lack of labour protections, and financial instability are challenges faced by workers, exacerbating social exclusion. The text highlights initiatives such as Fairwork, which aims to regulate digital labour and promote fairer working conditions. Furthermore, it proposes integrating Environmental Education into discussions of social and economic justice, arguing that labour issues are intrinsically connected to the fight for environmental justice. By linking the rights to decent work, life, and a safe environment, it suggests that Environmental Education offers a critical perspective that encompasses social, economic, ecological, and human rights dimensions, proposing new approaches to address inequalities worsened by technological acceleration.

This chapter describes how the East African Court of Justice is rooted in colonial legacies, which affect regional political norms and legal culture. It shows the EACJ’s decisions are characterized by substantial deference, frequently ruling in favor of states and relying extensively on restrictive interpretation. Less deference, however, is observed through the Court’s remedial orders. The chapter draws linkages between the EACJ’s deference and its pervasive political constraints. Namely, the EACJ’s strategic space is narrowed by weak formal independence and moderate political fragmentation. These two factors combine to undermine the Court’s legitimacy and imply that state resistance is feasible and credible. A significant episode of prior resistance also suggests states could execute future resistance. To the extent the Court does not defer, the chapter reveals how persuasive argumentation and public legitimation facilitate nondeference. Last, the chapter illustrates how the Court’s support networks insufficiently account for its substantial deference.