Böcker i Hart Studies in Constitutional-serien

This book considers the relationship between proportionality and facts in constitutional adjudication. Analysing where facts arise within each of the three stages of the structured proportionality test - suitability, necessity, and balancing - it considers the nature of these 'facts' vis-à-vis the facts that arise in the course of ordinary litigation. The book's central focus is on how proportionality has been applied by courts in practice, and it draws on the comparative experience of four jurisdictions across a range of legal systems. The central case study of the book is Australia, where the embryonic and contested nature of proportionality means it provides an illuminating study of how facts can inform the framing of constitutional tests. The rich proportionality jurisprudence from Germany, Canada, and South Africa is used to contextualise the approach of the High Court of Australia and to identify future directions for proportionality in Australia, at a time when the doctrine is in its formative stages.The book has three broad aims:First, it considers the role of facts within proportionality reasoning. Second, it offers procedural insights into fact-finding in constitutional litigation. Third, the book's analysis of the dynamic Australian case-law on proportionality means it also serves to clarify the nature and status of proportionality in Australia at a critical moment. Since the 2015 decision of McCloy v New South Wales, where four justices supported the introduction of a structured three-part test of proportionality, the Court has continued to disagree about the utility of such a test. These developments mean that this book, with its doctrinal and comparative approach, is particularly timely.

This book provides a theoretical framework which clarifies how different types of international norm conflicts can be solved efficiently. By drawing on Robert Alexy's distinction between rules and principles, it develops a novel approach which helps better identify and conceptualise norm conflicts and their resolution. The book develops a unique method by which to identify norms of international law as rules and principles respectively. Using examples taken from different international legal regimes, such as international environmental law and international human rights law, it argues that it is indeed possible to distinguish between the two types of norms within the body of international law. It goes on to use this distinction to consider which tools are available at the international level to resolve conflicts involving either type of norm, highlighting their gaps and inefficiencies. Finally, it provides a new framework to be used for looking at international conflicts and provides several case studies which show that drawing the distinction between rules and principles can be a means by which scholars, judicial bodies and states may analyse ambiguous judicial decisions or international legal provisions, and thus foster greater clarity in the field of international law.

This is the second part of a 2-volume set which presents an in-depth investigation into the canon of constitutionally conforming interpretation.This second volume builds upon the insights of volume 1, which includes national reports on the use of constitutional interpretation. In volume 2, the analysis is extended beyond the national context, discussing its use in the supranational and international context, such as in EU law or in the practice of the ECtHR and the IACtHR. It looks at constitutional amendments, global constitutionalism, the impact of unwritten constitutional provisions. The volume is rounded off by a comparative analyse, which formulates universally applicable insights.Together with volume 1, this book fills an important gap in legal scholarship and sets the stage for cross-national discourse.