This innovative Research Handbook explores judicial, scholarly, and theoretical approaches to general principles in the EU legal order against the backdrop of considerable uncertainty about the concept. It does so by analysing both a diverse range of general principles in discrete areas of EU law ('zooming in') and external, wider perspectives on the notion of a general principle of law from international law, comparative law, and legal theory ('zooming out'). Rather than arguing for a single closed definition of what a general principle of law in the EU legal order must look like, this Research Handbook identifies conceptual, theoretical, and legal parameters within which the doctrine of general principles can be meaningfully discussed and contested in EU law. The different analytical layers built into this Research Handbook shed light on whether general principles are defined by the different contexts in which they apply; whether general principles are in practice leading to more coherence between different areas of EU law; and what challenges they create for the EU legal order. Chapters thus contribute to a more refined methodological and doctrinal understanding of general principles in the EU legal order. Opening up new spaces to critically reflect on the concept, role, significance, and limitations of general principles, the Research Handbook on General Principles in EU Law will be a key resource for scholars and students of European law, politics, and theory of integration and internationalisation.

The UK's engagement with the legal protection of human rights at a European level has been, at varying stages, pioneering, sceptical and antagonistic. The UK government, media and public opinion have all at times expressed concerns about the growing influence of European human rights law, particularly in the controversial contexts of prisoner voting and deportation of suspected terrorists as well as in the context of British military action abroad. British politicians and judges have also, however, played important roles in drafting, implementing and interpreting the European Convention on Human Rights. Its incorporation into domestic law in the Human Rights Act 1998 intensified the ongoing debate about the UK's international and regional human rights commitments. Furthermore, the increasing importance of the European Union in the human rights sphere has added another layer to the relationship and highlights the complex relationship(s) between the UK government, the Westminster Parliament and judges in the UK, Strasbourg and Luxembourg. The book analyses the topical and contentious issue of the relationship between the UK and the European systems for the protection of human rights (ECHR and EU) from doctrinal, contextual and comparative perspectives and explores factors that influence the relationship of the UK and European human rights.

Privacy today is much debated as an individual's right against real or feared intrusions by the state, as exemplified by proposed identity cards and surveillance measures in the United Kingdom. In contrast, invasions of privacy by private individuals or bodies tend to arouse less concern. This book attempts to fill the gap by looking at the horizontal application of human rights after Douglas v Hello, Campbell v MGN and Caroline von Hannover v Germany. It provides a conceptual and theoretical framework and also considers specific particularly sensitive areas of law relating to privacy protection, such as intellectual property, employment and media law. It provides comparative perspectives by relating Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which serves as a focal point, to UK, Dutch, German and European Communities law. Several common threads are revealed running across jurisdictions and different areas of law and aspects of privacy. The most notable is the definition of privacy in terms of the autonomy of the individual, a notion associated with the liberal state in the classic sense but now acquiring more content as a human right also linked to ideas of social justice.

Modern constitutionalism has put a lot of hopes in parliaments but there is some consensus that these hopes have not been entirely fulfilled. At the same time, the role of parliaments in contemporary democracies continues to evolve as parliaments are faced with new challenges. How should they react to the new forms of executive and administrative action? Should they play a role in upholding judicial independence, although the latter is frequently seen as independence from parliament as well as the executive? How should they contribute to the protection of fundamental rights? The book aims at providing some answers to these questions by first setting the historic scene, giving a comparative overview of the modern history of a selection of major European deliberative institutions (UK, France, Germany and the European Parliament). The book then looks at themes around the doctrine of separation of powers, especially aspects of the relationship between parliament and the executive power and parliaments' role and attitude regarding the judiciary with a special focus on the independence of the judiciary in a comparative perspective.

The UK's engagement with the legal protection of human rights at a European level has been, at varying stages, pioneering, sceptical and antagonistic. The UK government, media and public opinion have all at times expressed concerns about the growing influence of European human rights law, particularly in the controversial contexts of prisoner voting and deportation of suspected terrorists as well as in the context of British military action abroad. British politicians and judges have also, however, played important roles in drafting, implementing and interpreting the European Convention on Human Rights. Its incorporation into domestic law in the Human Rights Act 1998 intensified the ongoing debate about the UK's international and regional human rights commitments. Furthermore, the increasing importance of the European Union in the human rights sphere has added another layer to the relationship and highlights the complex relationship(s) between the UK government, the Westminster Parliament and judges in the UK, Strasbourg and Luxembourg. The book analyses the topical and contentious issue of the relationship between the UK and the European systems for the protection of human rights (ECHR and EU) from doctrinal, contextual and comparative perspectives and explores factors that influence the relationship of the UK and European human rights.

While the legal systems of the UK and Germany differ in essential respects, the current process of 'constitutionalization' is well recognized on both sides of the English Channel. 'Constitutionalization' manifests itself in the evolution of a constitution and the influence of existing constitutional principles on the ordinary law. Human rights law provides one of the best examples of this process, and this book provides a comparative UK-German perspective on recent developments. First, the book addresses human rights questions which arise in both jurisdictions in a similar way, such as the tension between liberty and security, absolute rights, such as human dignity and the prohibition of torture, and the question how conflicts between human rights are to be resolved and conceptualized. A second theme considers the impact of human rights on different areas of domestic law, in particular administrative law, criminal law, labor law, and private law generally. Finally, a third theme focuses on the intersection of national, supra-national, and international human rights law, in particular after the entry into force of the EU Charter on Fundamental Rights. The book thus reveals convergent and divergent answers to similar problems, examines differences in impact of human rights on the legal systems under consideration, and traces parallel and distinct debates over human rights, as well as sensitivities that arise in multi-layer situations in the UK and Germany. (Series: Studies of the Oxford Institute of European and Comparative Law - Vol. 17)