The Foundations and Future of Public Law最新文献

筛选

英文中文

The Foundations and Future of Public Law Pub Date : 2020-03-26 DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198845249.003.0014

C. Harlow, R. Rawlings

{"title":"Proceduralism and Automation","authors":"C. Harlow, R. Rawlings","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198845249.003.0014","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198845249.003.0014","url":null,"abstract":"In this chapter, we argue that administrative procedure has become a central organising concept for administrative law. Our first theme is the steady proceduralisation of public administration experienced in recent years, in the framework of a relationship between courts and administration which we present as a two-way, non-hierarchical process. We look first at internal drivers to proceduralisation emanating from administration, notably the managerial reforms of the 1980s and the rise of regulation as a standard governance technique. We then turn to the contemporary case law of judicial review, focussing on the judicial response to, and stimulus for, administrative proceduralism. Our second theme is the idea of procedures as a repository for values and of values as an important, though often subliminal, driver of administrative procedure. We look at the potential for exchange as well as dissonance between public administration and administrative law. Our third theme concerns challenges to administrative law from the technological revolution currently under way. The impact of automation on public administration was at first rather modest; today, however, technology is taking great leaps forward—from computerisation to artificial intelligence and beyond. The innovations have so far been welcomed as beneficial—faster and more consistent administration, swifter and less costly courts and tribunals. It is time to recognise that we are facing a paradigm change, in which key values and procedures of administrative law, such as transparency, accountability, individuation, and due process, will need to be supported and sustained.","PeriodicalId":386897,"journal":{"name":"The Foundations and Future of Public Law","volume":"70 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-03-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115969960","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

The Mutual Judicial Influence of National Courts and the European Court of Justice through the Preliminary Rulings Mechanism 国家法院与欧洲法院通过初步裁决机制的相互司法影响

The Foundations and Future of Public Law Pub Date : 2020-03-26 DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198845249.003.0006

Gráinne de Búrca

{"title":"The Mutual Judicial Influence of National Courts and the European Court of Justice through the Preliminary Rulings Mechanism","authors":"Gráinne de Búrca","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198845249.003.0006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198845249.003.0006","url":null,"abstract":"Taking the moment of imminent UK exit from the European Union as an opportunity to reflect on the mutual influence of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and the English courts, this chapter examines the 113 preliminary references made by the higher English courts over a 10-year period to investigate two related questions. These are: first, the extent to which the CJEU’s rulings have been implemented by the British courts, and second, the extent to which the interpretations proposed by the UK courts may have influenced the CJEU. On the first question, the chapter’s findings indicate that it is very difficult to assess the extent to which the preliminary rulings of the CJEU were implemented by the referring UK courts, given the remarkable lack of information available about what happens following a preliminary ruling of the Luxembourg Court. On the second question, the chapter’s findings suggest that in the substantial number of cases in which the British courts advanced a proposed interpretation of EU law, the CJEU adopted that interpretation in a majority of those cases. Hence, even though the CJEU has rarely acknowledged the influence of national referring courts on its rulings, the cases referred from the higher UK courts over the past decade suggest that instead of a one-way relationship in which British courts were subject to the overriding authority of the CJEU, there was a process of mutual influence in which the Luxembourg court more often than not adopted the interpretation of EU law proposed by the British court.","PeriodicalId":386897,"journal":{"name":"The Foundations and Future of Public Law","volume":"67 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-03-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127126782","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Brexit and the Challenges of a ‘Post-Sovereign’ Legal Landscape 英国脱欧和“后主权”法律格局的挑战

The Foundations and Future of Public Law Pub Date : 2020-03-26 DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198845249.003.0019

S. D. Scott

引用次数: 0