This cutting-edge book facilitates debate amongst scholars in law, humanities and social sciences, where comparative methodology is far less well anchored in most areas compared to other research methods. It posits that these are disciplines in which comparative research is not simply a bonus, but is of the essence. Featuring discussions and reflections from scholars experienced in conducting comparative research, this book considers the ways in which comparative legal research can gain important comparative, qualitative and interpretive insights from the humanities and from the social sciences. Chapters examine contrasting comparative legal versus historical approaches, comparative sociology, comparative religion, comparative (legal) anthropology, comparative philosophy, comparative economics and more. Additionally, the book considers the challenges that lie ahead, not just for comparative legal research, but for comparative disciplines as a whole. Of the many challenges that are identified and discussed, the book concludes that comparative research can especially be further developed when it is also understood as a research design, instead of just a method. Inspiring and progressive, this book will be a crucial reference point for both research students and experienced researchers who are embarking on comparative research within the disciplines of law, humanities and social sciences.

Rule of law and constitutionalist ideals are understood by many, if not most, as necessary to create a just political order. Defying the traditional division between normative and positive theoretical approaches, this book explores how political reality on the one hand, and constitutional ideals on the other, mutually inform and influence each other. Seventeen chapters from leading international scholars cover a diverse range of topics and case studies to test the hypothesis that the best normative theories, including those regarding the role of constitutions, constitutionalism and the rule of law, conceive of the ideal and the real as mutually regulating.

What does doing comparative law involve? Too often, explicit methodological discussions in comparative law remain limited to the level of pure theory, neglecting to test out critiques and recommendations on concrete issues. This book bridges this gap between theory and practice in comparative legal studies. Essays by both established and younger comparative lawyers reflect on the methodological challenges arising in their own work and in work in their area. Taken together, they offer clear recommendations for, and critical reflection on, a wide range of innovative comparative research projects.

In his Judicial Deliberations: A Comparative Analysis of Judicial Transparency and Legitimacy (Oxford 2004), the American-French scholar Mitchel Lasser has, among other things, tried to re-establish the strengths of the French cassation system. Using Lasser's approach and ideas as a starting point, in this book judges from the French, Belgian and Dutch Cassation Courts reflect on the challenges that their Courts are facing. The book also contains a series of contributions from scholars analyzing the wide range of factors that determine the legitimacy of these courts' decisions. Specific attention is given to the Strasbourg Court of Human Rights that has been so important for the moral legitimacy of the European legal order, and to courts in post-communist systems, which face many similar challenges and are even under greater pressure to modernize. The book is a multidisciplinary contribution to the international debate about the legitimacy of the highest courts' rulings as well as the concept of judicial leadership and offers a new perspective in the USA versus Europe debate. It is recommended reading for academics, judges, policymakers, political scientists and students. Nick Huls is a Professor of socio-legal studies at the Faculty of Law of the Erasmus University Rotterdam and Leiden University's Faculty of Law, The Netherlands. Maurice Adams is a Professor of law at Tilburg University, The Netherlands, and part-time Professor of comparative law at Antwerp University in Belgium. JaccoBomhoff is a Lecturer in law at the Law Department of the London School of Economics in the UK.

Rule of law and constitutionalist ideals are understood by many, if not most, as necessary to create a just political order. Defying the traditional division between normative and positive theoretical approaches, this book explores how political reality on the one hand, and constitutional ideals on the other, mutually inform and influence each other. Seventeen chapters from leading international scholars cover a diverse range of topics and case studies to test the hypothesis that the best normative theories, including those regarding the role of constitutions, constitutionalism and the rule of law, conceive of the ideal and the real as mutually regulating.

What does doing comparative law involve? Too often, explicit methodological discussions in comparative law remain limited to the level of pure theory, neglecting to test out critiques and recommendations on concrete issues. This book bridges this gap between theory and practice in comparative legal studies. Essays by both established and younger comparative lawyers reflect on the methodological challenges arising in their own work and in work in their area. Taken together, they offer clear recommendations for, and critical reflection on, a wide range of innovative comparative research projects.

This important research review examines the most significant and instructive articles relating to comparative law methodology. They offer vast and comprehensive coverage of practices, principles, methods and sources in comparative legal research. The first section deals with preliminary considerations such as the aims of research and the questions one should ask, as well as how to select objects for comparison and formulate a research plan. The second part focuses on the comparative research of regulation, description, and explanation, along with discussion on functionalism, quantitative approaches, translation issues, legal transplants and global challenges. This review offers a balanced discussion of the seminal research which will benefit legal scholars, students, and all who are undertaking, or seeking to evaluate, comparative legal research.

The recently enacted Treaty on the Stability, Coordination and Governance of the Economic and Monetary Union (generally referred to as the Fiscal Compact) has introduced a 'golden rule', which is a detailed obligation that government budgets be balanced. Moreover, it required the 25 members of the EU which signed the Treaty in March 2012, to incorporate this 'golden rule' within their national Constitutions. This requirement represents a major and unprecedented development, raising formidable challenges to the nature and legitimacy of national Constitutions as well as to the future of the European integration project. This book analyses the new constitutional architecture of the European Economic and Monetary Union (EMU), examines in a comparative perspective the constitutionalization of budgetary rules in the legal systems of the Member States, and discusses the implications of these constitutional changes for the future of democracy and integration in the EU. By combining insights from law and economics, comparative institutional analysis and legal theory, the book offers a comprehensive survey of the constitutional incorporation of new fiscal and budgetary rules across Europe and a systematic normative discussion of the legitimacy issues at play. It thus contributes to a better understanding of the Euro-crisis, of the future of the EU, and the reforms needed towards a deeper and genuine EMU.

Awareness of the need to deepen the method and methodology of legal research is only recent. The same is true for comparative law, by nature a more adventurous branch of legal research, which is often something researchers simply do, whenever they look at foreign legal systems to answer one or more of a range of questions about law, whether these questions are doctrinal, economic, sociological, etc. Given the diversity of comparative research projects, the precise contours of the methods employed, or the epistemological issues raised by them, are to a great extent a function of the nature of the research questions asked. As a result, the search for a unique, one-size-fits-all comparative law methodology is unlikely to be fruitful. That, however, does not make reflection on the method and culture of comparative law meaningless. Mark Van Hoecke has been interested in many topics throughout his career, but legal theory, comparative law and methodology of law stand out. Building upon his work, this book brings together a group of leading authors working at the crossroads of these themes: the method and culture of comparative law. With contributions by: Maurice Adams, John Bell, Joxerramon Bengoetxea, Roger Brownsword, Sean Patrick Donlan, Rob van Gestel and Hans Micklitz, Patrick Glenn, Jaap Hage, Dirk Heirbaut, Jaakko Husa, Souichirou Kozuka and Luke Nottage, Martin Loehnig, Susan Millns, Toon Moonen, Francois Ost, Heikki Pihlajamaki, Geoffrey Samuel, Mathias Siems, Jorn Oyrehagen Sunde, Catherine Valcke, Matthew Grellette and Alain Wijffels. Review 'In this beautifully produced volume, leading theorists and researchers look at significant aspects of their fields...As a whole, the most important contribution of this volume, however, is having collected essays which all indicate, in various ways, the role of comparative law in enhancing knowledge not only of law but also society, of context and interdisciplinary approaches, and of the significant place of imaginative interpretation for our understanding of law and society'. Esin OErucu, The Edinburgh Law Review

After successive waves of EU enlargement, and pursuant to the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, the European Court of Justice finds itself on the brink of a new era. Both the institution itself and the broader setting within which it operates have become more heterogeneous than ever before. The issues now arriving on its docket are also often of great complexity, covering an unprecedented number of fields. The aims of this volume are to study the impact of these developments, examine the legitimacy of the Court's output in this novel context and provide an appraisal of its overall performance. In doing so, specific attention is paid to its most recent case law on four topics: the general principles of EU law, external relations, the internal market and Union citizenship.

Awareness of the need to deepen the method and methodology of legal research is only recent. The same is true for comparative law, by nature a more adventurous branch of legal research, which is often something researchers simply do, whenever they look at foreign legal systems to answer one or more of a range of questions about law, whether these questions are doctrinal, economic, sociological, etc. Given the diversity of comparative research projects, the precise contours of the methods employed, or the epistemological issues raised by them, are to a great extent a function of the nature of the research questions asked. As a result, the search for a unique, one-size-fits-all comparative law methodology is unlikely to be fruitful. That however does not make reflection on the method and culture of comparative law meaningless. Mark Van Hoecke has, throughout his career, been interested in many topics, but legal theory, comparative law and methodology of law stand out. Building upon his work, this book brings together a group of leading authors working at the crossroads of these themes: the method and culture of comparative law. With contributions by: Maurice Adams, John Bell, Joxerramon Bengoetxea, Roger Brownsword, Sean Patrick Donlan, Rob van Gestel and Hans Micklitz, Patrick Glenn, Jaap Hage, Dirk Heirbaut, Jaakko Husa, Souichirou Kozuka and Luke Nottage, Martin Loehnig, Susan Millns, Toon Moonen, Francois Ost, Heikki Pihlajamaki, Geoffrey Samuel, Mathias Siems, Jorn Oyrehagen Sunde, Catherine Valcke and Matthew Grellette, Alain Wijffels.

This scarce antiquarian book is a selection from Kessinger Publishing's Legacy Reprint Series. Due to its age, it may contain imperfections such as marks, notations, marginalia and flawed pages. Because we believe this work is culturally important, we have made it available as part of our commitment to protecting, preserving, and promoting the world's literature. Kessinger Publishing is the place to find hundreds of thousands of rare and hard-to-find books with something of interest for everyone!

This book is a facsimile reprint and may contain imperfections such as marks, notations, marginalia and flawed pages.

The recently enacted Treaty on the Stability, Coordination and Governance of the Economic and Monetary Union (generally referred to as the Fiscal Compact) has introduced a 'golden rule', which is a detailed obligation that government budgets be balanced. Moreover, it required the 25 members of the EU which signed the Treaty in March 2012, to incorporate this 'golden rule' within their national Constitutions. This requirement represents a major and unprecedented development, raising formidable challenges to the nature and legitimacy of national Constitutions as well as to the future of the European integration project. This book analyses the new constitutional architecture of the European Economic and Monetary Union (EMU), examines in a comparative perspective the constitutionalization of budgetary rules in the legal systems of the Member States, and discusses the implications of these constitutional changes for the future of democracy and integration in the EU. By combining insights from law and economics, comparative institutional analysis and legal theory, the book offers a comprehensive survey of the constitutional incorporation of new fiscal and budgetary rules across Europe and a systematic normative discussion of the legitimacy issues at play. It thus contributes to a better understanding of the Euro-crisis, of the future of the EU, and the reforms needed towards a deeper and genuine EMU.

After successive waves of EU enlargement, and pursuant to the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, the European Court of Justice finds itself on the brink of a new era. Both the institution itself and the broader setting within which it operates have become more heterogeneous than ever before. The issues now arriving on its docket are also often of great complexity, covering an unprecedented number of fields. The aims of this volume are to study the impact of these developments, examine the legitimacy of the Court's output in this novel context and provide an appraisal of its overall performance. In doing so, specific attention is paid to its most recent case law on four topics: the general principles of EU law, external relations, the internal market and Union citizenship. Featuring contributions by Maurice Adams, Henri de Waele, Johan Meeusen and Gert Straetmans, Koen Lenaerts, Jan Mazak and Martin Moser, Stephen Weatherill, Jukka Snell, Michael Dougan, Daniel Thym, Eileen Denza, Michal Bobek, and Joseph Weiler.

This book is a successor to J Griffiths, A Bood and H Weyers, Euthanasia and Law in the Netherlands (Amsterdam University Press 1998) which was widely praised for its thoroughness, clarity, and accuracy. The new book emphasises recent legal developments and new research, and has been expanded to include a full treatment of Belgium, where since 2002 euthanasia has also become legal. The book also includes descriptions written by local specialists of the legal situation and what is known about actual practice in a number of other European countries (England and Wales, France, Italy, Scandinavia, Spain, Switzerland). The book strives for as complete and dispassionate a description of the situation as possible. It covers in detail: - the substantive law applicable to euthanasia, physician-assisted suicide, withholding and withdrawing treatment, use of pain relief in potentially lethal doses, palliative and terminal sedation, and termination of life without a request (in particular in the case of newborn babies); -the process of legal development that has led to the current state of the law; -the system of legal control and its operation in practice; -the results of empirical research concerning actual medical practice. A concluding part deals with some general questions that arise out of the material presented: Is the legalisation of euthanasia an example of the decline of law or should it, on the contrary, be seen as part and parcel of the increasing juridification of the doctor-patient relationship? Does the Dutch experience with legalised euthanasia support the idea of a 'slippery slope' toward a situation in which life-especially of the more vulnerable members of society-is less effectively protected? Is it possible to explain and to predict when a society will decide to legalise euthanasia?