Go to main content

Deference to the administration in judicial review : comparative perspectives / Guobin Zhu, editor.

Zhu, Guobin, editor.
2019
K2100
Available Online
Formats
Format
BibTeX
MARCXML
TextMARC
MARC
DublinCore
EndNote
NLM
RefWorks
RIS
Add to Basket

Linked e-resources

Linked Resource
Online Access
Concurrent users
Unlimited
Authorized users
Authorized users
Document Delivery Supplied
Can lend chapters, not whole ebooks

Details

Title
Deference to the administration in judicial review : comparative perspectives / Guobin Zhu, editor.
ISBN
9783030315399 (electronic book)
3030315398 (electronic book)
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31
Published
Cham, Switzerland : Springer, [2019]
Language
English
Description
1 online resource (xiii, 445 pages).
Item Number
10.1007/978-3-030-31 doi
Call Number
K2100
Dewey Decimal Classification
347.01
Summary
This book investigates judicial deference to the administration in judicial review, a concept and legal practice that can be found to a greater or lesser degree in every constitutional system. In each system, deference functions differently, because the positioning of the judiciary with regard to the separation of powers, the role of the courts as a mechanism of checks and balances, and the scope of judicial review differ. In addition, the way deference works within the constitutional system itself is complex, multi-faceted and often covert. Although judicial deference to the administration is a topical theme in comparative administrative law, a general examination of national systems is still lacking. As such, a theoretical and empirical review is called for. Accordingly, this book presents national reports from 15 jurisdictions, ranging from Argentina, Canada and the US, to the EU. Constituting the outcome of the 20th General Congress of the International Academy of Comparative Law, held in Fukuoka, Japan in July 2018, it offers a valuable and unique resource for the study of comparative administrative law.
Bibliography, etc. Note
Includes bibliographical references.
Access Note
Access limited to authorized users.
Source of Description
Online resource; title from PDF title page (SpringerLink, viewed December 4, 2019).
Added Author
Zhu, Guobin, editor.
Series
Ius comparatum ; v. 39.
Linked Resources
Online Access
Record Appears in
Online Resources > Ebooks
All Resources
Deference to the Administration in Judicial Review: Comparative Perspectives
Deference to the Administration in Judicial Review in Argentina
Deference to the Administration in Judicial Review in Australia
Comparer la déférence judiciaire : regards canadiens vers lextérieur
Deference to the Administration in Judicial Review in China
Deference to the Administration in Judicial Review in the Czech Republic
Deference to the Administration in Judicial Review in Denmark
Deference to the Administration in Judicial Review: The European Union
Deference to the Administration in Judicial Review in Finland
A Principled Approach to Judicial Deference for Hong Kong
Judicial Deference to the Administration in Israel
Judicial Review of Administrative Action in Italy: Beyond Deference?
Deference to the Administration in Judicial Review in Japan
Deference to the Administration in Judicial Review: The Case of the Netherlands
The "Dreadful Truth" and Transparent Fictions: Deference in New Zealand Administrative Law
Deference to the Public Administration in Judicial Review: A Polish Perspective'The Notion of a Subjective or Unfettered Discretion is Contrary to the Rule of Law: Judicial Review of Administrative Action in Singapore
Full Judicial Review or Administrative Discretion? A Swedish Perspective on Deference to the Administration
Judicial Deference to the Administration in the United States.

Browse Subjects

Show more subjects...

Statistics

from
to
Export