| Notes: | Contributors include: J. Bell, E. Carolan, C. Chandrachud, A. Kavanagh, C. Kelly, J. Lavapuro, T. Ojanen, M.-L. Paris, P. Passaglia, A.R. Robledo, M. Rosenfeld, M. Scheinin, J. Stellios, R. Uitz, M. Verdussen, M. Zagor.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
Description based on print record.
|
|---|
| Summary: | Constitutional review has become an essential feature of modern liberal democratic constitutionalism. In particular, constitutional review in the context of rights litigation has proved to be most challenging for the courts. By offering in-depth analyses on changes affecting constitutional design and constitutional adjudication, while also engaging with general theories of comparative constitutionalism, this book seeks to provide a heightened understanding of the constitutional and political responses to the issue of adaptability and endurance of rights-based constitutional review. These original contributions, written by an array of distinguished experts and illustrated by the most up-to-date case law, cover Australia, Belgium, Finland, France, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Spain, the United Kingdom and the United States, and include constitutional systems that are not commonly studied in comparative constitutional studies. Providing structured analyses, the editors combine studies of common law and civil law jurisdictions, centralized and decentralized systems of constitutional review, and large and small jurisdictions. This multi-jurisdictional study will appeal to members of the judiciary, policymakers and practitioners looking for valuable insights into the case law of a range of constitutional and supreme courts in this rapidly expanding field of constitutional adjudication. It also serves as an excellent resource for academics, scholars and advanced students in the fields of law, human rights and political science.
|
|---|
