Wildy logo
(020) 7242 5778
enquiries@wildy.com

Wildy’s Book News

Book News cover photo

Vol 23 No 7 July/August 2018

Book of the Month

Cover of Housing Allocations and Homelessness: Law and Practice

Housing Allocations and Homelessness: Law and Practice

Price: £99.99 + £10.30 VAT

Offers for Newly Called Barristers & Students

Special Discounts for Newly Called & Students

Read More ...


Secondhand & Out of Print

Browse Secondhand Online

Read More...


Biall2018b
20pcswmx
4thframecut
Sa 0318 030 banking titles 2018 700 x 150 %281%29 %281%29
Arch mags 2019

Proportionality and Judicial Activism: Fundamental Rights Adjudication in Canada, Germany and South Africa


ISBN13: 9781316630822
Published: June 2018
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Country of Publication: UK
Format: Paperback (Hardback in 2017)
Price: £22.99
Hardback edition , ISBN13 9781107177987



This is a Print On Demand Title.
The publisher will print a copy to fulfill your order. Books can take between 1 to 3 weeks. Looseleaf titles between 1 to 2 weeks.

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.

Subjects:
Constitutional and Administrative Law
Contents:
Introduction
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.