Public Law Adjudication in Common Law Systems Process and Substance
Produktdetaljer
Om bidragsyterne
John Bell is Professor of Law and Mark Elliott is Professor of Public Law at the University of Cambridge. Jason NE Varuhas is Associate Professor at the University of Melbourne. Philip Murray is a former Fellow in Law at St John’s College, Cambridge.In an age that has seen the publication of a number of books of essays on administrative law, this publication stands above the crowd, by reason of its coherent development of themes and the uniformly high quality of the essays. The authors and the publisher are to be congratulated.
- Justice John Basten, Cambridge Law Journal
This volume arises from the inaugural Public Law Conference hosted in September 2014 by the Centre for Public Law at the University of Cambridge, which brought together leading public lawyers from a number of common law jurisdictions. While those from such jurisdictions share background understandings, significant differences within the common law world create opportunities for valuable exchanges of ideas and debate.
This collection draws upon one of the principal sub-themes that emerged during the conference – namely, the the way in which relationships and distinctions between the notions of ‘process’ and ‘substance’ play out in relation to and inform adjudication in public law cases. The essays contained in this volume address those issues from a variety of perspectives. While the bulk of the chapters consider topical issues in judicial review, either on common law or human rights grounds, or both, other chapters adopt more theoretical, historical, empirical or contextual approaches. Concluding chapters reflect generally on the papers in the collection and the value of facilitating cross-jurisdictional dialogue.
1. Introduction
John Bell, Mark Elliott, Jason NE Varuhas and Philip Murray
2. Public Reason and Administrative Legitimacy
Jerry L Mashaw
3. Administrative Law: A Values-based Approach
Paul Daly
4. The Public Interest Conception of Public Law: Its Procedural Origins and Substantive Implications
Jason NE Varuhas
5. Process, Substance and the History of Error of Law Review
Philip Murray
6. The Growth of Substantive Review: The Changes, their Causes and their Consequences
Mark Aronson
7. ‘Blasphemy Against Basics’ : Doctrine, Conceptual Reasoning and Certain Decisions of the UK Supreme Court
Christopher Forsyth
8. The Legitimacy of Expectations About Fairness: Can Process and Substance be Untangled?
Matthew Groves and Greg Weeks
9. Judicial Review of Delegated Legislation: Why Favour Substantive Review over Procedural Review?
Andrew Edgar
10. Transubstantiation in Canadian Public Law: Processing Substance and Instantiating Process
Mary Liston
11. Is Judicial Review Qualitative?
Alan Robertson
12. Remedies for Laws that Violate Human Rights
Kent Roach
13. ‘Striking Back’ and ‘Clamping Down’: An Alternative Perspective on Judicial Review
Carol Harlow and Richard Rawlings
14. The Use and Effects of Judicial Review: Assumptions and the Empirical Evidence
Maurice Sunkin and Varda Bondy
15. Common Law Public Law: Some Comparative Reflections
Cheryl Saunders
16. Comparison, Realism and Theory in Public Law
David Feldman