Proportionality and judicial activism: fundamental rights adjudication in Canada, Germany and South Africa
"The principle of proportionality is currently one of the most discussed topics in the field of comparative constitutional law. Many critics claim that courts use the proportionality test as an instrument of judicial self-empowerment. Proportionality and Judicial Activism tests this hypothesis...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Thesis/Dissertation Book |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
[2017]
|
| Subjects: | |
| Summary: | "The principle of proportionality is currently one of the most discussed topics in the field of comparative constitutional law. Many critics claim that courts use the proportionality test as an instrument of judicial self-empowerment. Proportionality and Judicial Activism tests this hypothesis empirically; it systematically and comparatively analyses the fundamental rights jurisprudence of the Canadian Supreme Court, the German Federal Constitutional Court and the South African Constitutional Court. The book shows that the proportionality test does give judges a considerable amount of discretion. However, this analytical openness does not necessarily lead to judicial activism. Instead, judges are faced with significant institutional constraints, as a result of which all three examined courts refrain from using proportionality for purposes of judicial activism"... |
| Item Description: | Includes bibliographical references and index |
| Physical Description: | 258 Seiten |
| ISBN: | 9781107177987 9781316630822 |
Staff View
MARC
| LEADER | 00000nam a2200000 c 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | BV044718865 | ||
| 003 | DE-604 | ||
| 005 | 20180618 | ||
| 007 | t| | ||
| 008 | 180117s2017 xxk m||| 00||| eng d | ||
| 020 | |a 9781107177987 |c Hardback: EUR 79.35(DE) |9 978-1-107-17798-7 | ||
| 020 | |a 9781316630822 |9 978-1-316-63082-2 | ||
| 035 | |a (OCoLC)1019998867 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)BVBBV044718865 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-604 |b ger |e rda | ||
| 041 | 0 | |a eng | |
| 044 | |a xxk |c GB | ||
| 049 | |a DE-19 |a DE-188 |a DE-29 | ||
| 050 | 0 | |a K3367 | |
| 082 | 0 | |a 342.08/5 |2 23 | |
| 084 | |a PL 625 |0 (DE-625)137089: |2 rvk | ||
| 084 | |a PL 734 |0 (DE-625)137270: |2 rvk | ||
| 084 | |a PL 755 |0 (DE-625)137279: |2 rvk | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Petersen, Niels |d 1978- |e Verfasser |0 (DE-588)141057254 |4 aut | |
| 240 | 1 | 0 | |a Verhältnismässigkeit als Rationaliätskontrolle |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Proportionality and judicial activism |b fundamental rights adjudication in Canada, Germany and South Africa |c Niels Petersen, University of Münster, Germany |
| 264 | 1 | |a Cambridge |b Cambridge University Press |c [2017] | |
| 264 | 4 | |c © 2017 | |
| 300 | |a 258 Seiten | ||
| 336 | |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |b n |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |b nc |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Includes bibliographical references and index | ||
| 502 | |b Habilitationsschrift |c Universität Bonn |d 2012 |g Titel der Habilitationsschrift: Verhältnismässigkeit als Rationaliätskontrolle : eine rechtsempirische Studie verfassungsrechtlicher Rechtsprechung zu den Freiheitsgrundrechten | ||
| 520 | |a "The principle of proportionality is currently one of the most discussed topics in the field of comparative constitutional law. Many critics claim that courts use the proportionality test as an instrument of judicial self-empowerment. Proportionality and Judicial Activism tests this hypothesis empirically; it systematically and comparatively analyses the fundamental rights jurisprudence of the Canadian Supreme Court, the German Federal Constitutional Court and the South African Constitutional Court. The book shows that the proportionality test does give judges a considerable amount of discretion. However, this analytical openness does not necessarily lead to judicial activism. Instead, judges are faced with significant institutional constraints, as a result of which all three examined courts refrain from using proportionality for purposes of judicial activism"... | ||
| 534 | |c 2015 | ||
| 610 | 2 | 7 | |a Deutschland |b Bundesverfassungsgericht |0 (DE-588)2117905-0 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
| 610 | 2 | 7 | |a Südafrika |b Constitutional Court |0 (DE-588)5190126-2 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
| 610 | 2 | 7 | |a Kanada |b Supreme Court |0 (DE-588)14216-5 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
| 650 | 4 | |a Political questions and judicial power |z Canada | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Political questions and judicial power |z Germany | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Political questions and judicial power |z South Africa | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Proportionality in law |z Canada | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Proportionality in law |z Germany | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Proportionality in law |z South Africa | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Court of last resort |z Canada | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Court of last resort |z Germany | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Court of last resort |z South Africa | |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Handlungsspielraum |0 (DE-588)4127505-6 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Abwägung |0 (DE-588)4141183-3 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Politik |0 (DE-588)4046514-7 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Verhältnismäßigkeitsgrundsatz |0 (DE-588)4191765-0 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Rechtsprechung |0 (DE-588)4115710-2 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Rechtsvergleich |0 (DE-588)4115712-6 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
| 651 | 4 | |a Deutschland | |
| 651 | 4 | |a Kanada | |
| 651 | 4 | |a Südafrika (Staat) | |
| 655 | 7 | |0 (DE-588)4113937-9 |a Hochschulschrift |2 gnd-content | |
| 689 | 0 | 0 | |a Deutschland |b Bundesverfassungsgericht |0 (DE-588)2117905-0 |D b |
| 689 | 0 | 1 | |a Kanada |b Supreme Court |0 (DE-588)14216-5 |D b |
| 689 | 0 | 2 | |a Südafrika |b Constitutional Court |0 (DE-588)5190126-2 |D b |
| 689 | 0 | 3 | |a Rechtsprechung |0 (DE-588)4115710-2 |D s |
| 689 | 0 | 4 | |a Politik |0 (DE-588)4046514-7 |D s |
| 689 | 0 | 5 | |a Handlungsspielraum |0 (DE-588)4127505-6 |D s |
| 689 | 0 | 6 | |a Abwägung |0 (DE-588)4141183-3 |D s |
| 689 | 0 | 7 | |a Verhältnismäßigkeitsgrundsatz |0 (DE-588)4191765-0 |D s |
| 689 | 0 | 8 | |a Rechtsvergleich |0 (DE-588)4115712-6 |D s |
| 689 | 0 | |8 1\p |5 DE-604 | |
| 775 | 0 | 8 | |i Reproduktion von |a Petersen, Niels |t Verhältnismässigkeit als Rationalitätskontrolle |d Tübingen : Mohr Siebeck, 2015 |
| 776 | 0 | 8 | |i Erscheint auch als |n Online-Ausgabe |z 978-1-316-82333-0 |
| 883 | 1 | |8 1\p |a cgwrk |d 20201028 |q DE-101 |u https://d-nb.info/provenance/plan#cgwrk | |
| 943 | 1 | |a oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-030115210 | |
Record in the Search Index
| _version_ | 1818983862294806528 |
|---|---|
| any_adam_object | |
| author | Petersen, Niels 1978- |
| author_GND | (DE-588)141057254 |
| author_facet | Petersen, Niels 1978- |
| author_role | aut |
| author_sort | Petersen, Niels 1978- |
| author_variant | n p np |
| building | Verbundindex |
| bvnumber | BV044718865 |
| callnumber-first | K - Law |
| callnumber-label | K3367 |
| callnumber-raw | K3367 |
| callnumber-search | K3367 |
| callnumber-sort | K 43367 |
| callnumber-subject | K - General Law |
| classification_rvk | PL 625 PL 734 PL 755 |
| ctrlnum | (OCoLC)1019998867 (DE-599)BVBBV044718865 |
| dewey-full | 342.08/5 |
| dewey-hundreds | 300 - Social sciences |
| dewey-ones | 342 - Constitutional and administrative law |
| dewey-raw | 342.08/5 |
| dewey-search | 342.08/5 |
| dewey-sort | 3342.08 15 |
| dewey-tens | 340 - Law |
| discipline | Rechtswissenschaft |
| format | Thesis Book |
| fullrecord | <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>04581nam a2200829 c 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">BV044718865</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-604</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20180618 </controlfield><controlfield tag="007">t|</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">180117s2017 xxk m||| 00||| eng d</controlfield><datafield tag="020" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">9781107177987</subfield><subfield code="c">Hardback: EUR 79.35(DE)</subfield><subfield code="9">978-1-107-17798-7</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="020" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">9781316630822</subfield><subfield code="9">978-1-316-63082-2</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(OCoLC)1019998867</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)BVBBV044718865</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-604</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="e">rda</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="044" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">xxk</subfield><subfield code="c">GB</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="049" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-19</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-188</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-29</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">K3367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">342.08/5</subfield><subfield code="2">23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">PL 625</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-625)137089:</subfield><subfield code="2">rvk</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">PL 734</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-625)137270:</subfield><subfield code="2">rvk</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">PL 755</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-625)137279:</subfield><subfield code="2">rvk</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Petersen, Niels</subfield><subfield code="d">1978-</subfield><subfield code="e">Verfasser</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)141057254</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="240" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Verhältnismässigkeit als Rationaliätskontrolle</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Proportionality and judicial activism</subfield><subfield code="b">fundamental rights adjudication in Canada, Germany and South Africa</subfield><subfield code="c">Niels Petersen, University of Münster, Germany</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Cambridge</subfield><subfield code="b">Cambridge University Press</subfield><subfield code="c">[2017]</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="c">© 2017</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">258 Seiten</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Includes bibliographical references and index</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="502" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">Habilitationsschrift</subfield><subfield code="c">Universität Bonn</subfield><subfield code="d">2012</subfield><subfield code="g">Titel der Habilitationsschrift: Verhältnismässigkeit als Rationaliätskontrolle : eine rechtsempirische Studie verfassungsrechtlicher Rechtsprechung zu den Freiheitsgrundrechten</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">"The principle of proportionality is currently one of the most discussed topics in the field of comparative constitutional law. Many critics claim that courts use the proportionality test as an instrument of judicial self-empowerment. Proportionality and Judicial Activism tests this hypothesis empirically; it systematically and comparatively analyses the fundamental rights jurisprudence of the Canadian Supreme Court, the German Federal Constitutional Court and the South African Constitutional Court. The book shows that the proportionality test does give judges a considerable amount of discretion. However, this analytical openness does not necessarily lead to judicial activism. Instead, judges are faced with significant institutional constraints, as a result of which all three examined courts refrain from using proportionality for purposes of judicial activism"...</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="534" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="c">2015</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="610" ind1="2" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Deutschland</subfield><subfield code="b">Bundesverfassungsgericht</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)2117905-0</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="610" ind1="2" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Südafrika</subfield><subfield code="b">Constitutional Court</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)5190126-2</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="610" ind1="2" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Kanada</subfield><subfield code="b">Supreme Court</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)14216-5</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Political questions and judicial power</subfield><subfield code="z">Canada</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Political questions and judicial power</subfield><subfield code="z">Germany</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Political questions and judicial power</subfield><subfield code="z">South Africa</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Proportionality in law</subfield><subfield code="z">Canada</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Proportionality in law</subfield><subfield code="z">Germany</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Proportionality in law</subfield><subfield code="z">South Africa</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Court of last resort</subfield><subfield code="z">Canada</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Court of last resort</subfield><subfield code="z">Germany</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Court of last resort</subfield><subfield code="z">South Africa</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Handlungsspielraum</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4127505-6</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Abwägung</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4141183-3</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Politik</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4046514-7</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Verhältnismäßigkeitsgrundsatz</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4191765-0</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Rechtsprechung</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4115710-2</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Rechtsvergleich</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4115712-6</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Deutschland</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Kanada</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Südafrika (Staat)</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="655" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4113937-9</subfield><subfield code="a">Hochschulschrift</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd-content</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Deutschland</subfield><subfield code="b">Bundesverfassungsgericht</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)2117905-0</subfield><subfield code="D">b</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Kanada</subfield><subfield code="b">Supreme Court</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)14216-5</subfield><subfield code="D">b</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">Südafrika</subfield><subfield code="b">Constitutional Court</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)5190126-2</subfield><subfield code="D">b</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="3"><subfield code="a">Rechtsprechung</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4115710-2</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Politik</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4046514-7</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="5"><subfield code="a">Handlungsspielraum</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4127505-6</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="6"><subfield code="a">Abwägung</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4141183-3</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Verhältnismäßigkeitsgrundsatz</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4191765-0</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="a">Rechtsvergleich</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4115712-6</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="8">1\p</subfield><subfield code="5">DE-604</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="775" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Reproduktion von</subfield><subfield code="a">Petersen, Niels</subfield><subfield code="t">Verhältnismässigkeit als Rationalitätskontrolle</subfield><subfield code="d">Tübingen : Mohr Siebeck, 2015</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="776" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Erscheint auch als</subfield><subfield code="n">Online-Ausgabe</subfield><subfield code="z">978-1-316-82333-0</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="883" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="8">1\p</subfield><subfield code="a">cgwrk</subfield><subfield code="d">20201028</subfield><subfield code="q">DE-101</subfield><subfield code="u">https://d-nb.info/provenance/plan#cgwrk</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="943" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-030115210</subfield></datafield></record></collection> |
| genre | (DE-588)4113937-9 Hochschulschrift gnd-content |
| genre_facet | Hochschulschrift |
| geographic | Deutschland Kanada Südafrika (Staat) |
| geographic_facet | Deutschland Kanada Südafrika (Staat) |
| id | DE-604.BV044718865 |
| illustrated | Not Illustrated |
| indexdate | 2024-12-20T18:09:51Z |
| institution | BVB |
| isbn | 9781107177987 9781316630822 |
| language | English |
| oai_aleph_id | oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-030115210 |
| oclc_num | 1019998867 |
| open_access_boolean | |
| owner | DE-19 DE-BY-UBM DE-188 DE-29 |
| owner_facet | DE-19 DE-BY-UBM DE-188 DE-29 |
| physical | 258 Seiten |
| publishDate | 2017 |
| publishDateSearch | 2017 |
| publishDateSort | 2017 |
| publisher | Cambridge University Press |
| record_format | marc |
| spelling | Petersen, Niels 1978- Verfasser (DE-588)141057254 aut Verhältnismässigkeit als Rationaliätskontrolle Proportionality and judicial activism fundamental rights adjudication in Canada, Germany and South Africa Niels Petersen, University of Münster, Germany Cambridge Cambridge University Press [2017] © 2017 258 Seiten txt rdacontent n rdamedia nc rdacarrier Includes bibliographical references and index Habilitationsschrift Universität Bonn 2012 Titel der Habilitationsschrift: Verhältnismässigkeit als Rationaliätskontrolle : eine rechtsempirische Studie verfassungsrechtlicher Rechtsprechung zu den Freiheitsgrundrechten "The principle of proportionality is currently one of the most discussed topics in the field of comparative constitutional law. Many critics claim that courts use the proportionality test as an instrument of judicial self-empowerment. Proportionality and Judicial Activism tests this hypothesis empirically; it systematically and comparatively analyses the fundamental rights jurisprudence of the Canadian Supreme Court, the German Federal Constitutional Court and the South African Constitutional Court. The book shows that the proportionality test does give judges a considerable amount of discretion. However, this analytical openness does not necessarily lead to judicial activism. Instead, judges are faced with significant institutional constraints, as a result of which all three examined courts refrain from using proportionality for purposes of judicial activism"... 2015 Deutschland Bundesverfassungsgericht (DE-588)2117905-0 gnd rswk-swf Südafrika Constitutional Court (DE-588)5190126-2 gnd rswk-swf Kanada Supreme Court (DE-588)14216-5 gnd rswk-swf Political questions and judicial power Canada Political questions and judicial power Germany Political questions and judicial power South Africa Proportionality in law Canada Proportionality in law Germany Proportionality in law South Africa Court of last resort Canada Court of last resort Germany Court of last resort South Africa Handlungsspielraum (DE-588)4127505-6 gnd rswk-swf Abwägung (DE-588)4141183-3 gnd rswk-swf Politik (DE-588)4046514-7 gnd rswk-swf Verhältnismäßigkeitsgrundsatz (DE-588)4191765-0 gnd rswk-swf Rechtsprechung (DE-588)4115710-2 gnd rswk-swf Rechtsvergleich (DE-588)4115712-6 gnd rswk-swf Deutschland Kanada Südafrika (Staat) (DE-588)4113937-9 Hochschulschrift gnd-content Deutschland Bundesverfassungsgericht (DE-588)2117905-0 b Kanada Supreme Court (DE-588)14216-5 b Südafrika Constitutional Court (DE-588)5190126-2 b Rechtsprechung (DE-588)4115710-2 s Politik (DE-588)4046514-7 s Handlungsspielraum (DE-588)4127505-6 s Abwägung (DE-588)4141183-3 s Verhältnismäßigkeitsgrundsatz (DE-588)4191765-0 s Rechtsvergleich (DE-588)4115712-6 s 1\p DE-604 Reproduktion von Petersen, Niels Verhältnismässigkeit als Rationalitätskontrolle Tübingen : Mohr Siebeck, 2015 Erscheint auch als Online-Ausgabe 978-1-316-82333-0 1\p cgwrk 20201028 DE-101 https://d-nb.info/provenance/plan#cgwrk |
| spellingShingle | Petersen, Niels 1978- Proportionality and judicial activism fundamental rights adjudication in Canada, Germany and South Africa Deutschland Bundesverfassungsgericht (DE-588)2117905-0 gnd Südafrika Constitutional Court (DE-588)5190126-2 gnd Kanada Supreme Court (DE-588)14216-5 gnd Political questions and judicial power Canada Political questions and judicial power Germany Political questions and judicial power South Africa Proportionality in law Canada Proportionality in law Germany Proportionality in law South Africa Court of last resort Canada Court of last resort Germany Court of last resort South Africa Handlungsspielraum (DE-588)4127505-6 gnd Abwägung (DE-588)4141183-3 gnd Politik (DE-588)4046514-7 gnd Verhältnismäßigkeitsgrundsatz (DE-588)4191765-0 gnd Rechtsprechung (DE-588)4115710-2 gnd Rechtsvergleich (DE-588)4115712-6 gnd |
| subject_GND | (DE-588)2117905-0 (DE-588)5190126-2 (DE-588)14216-5 (DE-588)4127505-6 (DE-588)4141183-3 (DE-588)4046514-7 (DE-588)4191765-0 (DE-588)4115710-2 (DE-588)4115712-6 (DE-588)4113937-9 |
| title | Proportionality and judicial activism fundamental rights adjudication in Canada, Germany and South Africa |
| title_alt | Verhältnismässigkeit als Rationaliätskontrolle |
| title_auth | Proportionality and judicial activism fundamental rights adjudication in Canada, Germany and South Africa |
| title_exact_search | Proportionality and judicial activism fundamental rights adjudication in Canada, Germany and South Africa |
| title_full | Proportionality and judicial activism fundamental rights adjudication in Canada, Germany and South Africa Niels Petersen, University of Münster, Germany |
| title_fullStr | Proportionality and judicial activism fundamental rights adjudication in Canada, Germany and South Africa Niels Petersen, University of Münster, Germany |
| title_full_unstemmed | Proportionality and judicial activism fundamental rights adjudication in Canada, Germany and South Africa Niels Petersen, University of Münster, Germany |
| title_short | Proportionality and judicial activism |
| title_sort | proportionality and judicial activism fundamental rights adjudication in canada germany and south africa |
| title_sub | fundamental rights adjudication in Canada, Germany and South Africa |
| topic | Deutschland Bundesverfassungsgericht (DE-588)2117905-0 gnd Südafrika Constitutional Court (DE-588)5190126-2 gnd Kanada Supreme Court (DE-588)14216-5 gnd Political questions and judicial power Canada Political questions and judicial power Germany Political questions and judicial power South Africa Proportionality in law Canada Proportionality in law Germany Proportionality in law South Africa Court of last resort Canada Court of last resort Germany Court of last resort South Africa Handlungsspielraum (DE-588)4127505-6 gnd Abwägung (DE-588)4141183-3 gnd Politik (DE-588)4046514-7 gnd Verhältnismäßigkeitsgrundsatz (DE-588)4191765-0 gnd Rechtsprechung (DE-588)4115710-2 gnd Rechtsvergleich (DE-588)4115712-6 gnd |
| topic_facet | Deutschland Bundesverfassungsgericht Südafrika Constitutional Court Kanada Supreme Court Political questions and judicial power Canada Political questions and judicial power Germany Political questions and judicial power South Africa Proportionality in law Canada Proportionality in law Germany Proportionality in law South Africa Court of last resort Canada Court of last resort Germany Court of last resort South Africa Handlungsspielraum Abwägung Politik Verhältnismäßigkeitsgrundsatz Rechtsprechung Rechtsvergleich Deutschland Kanada Südafrika (Staat) Hochschulschrift |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT petersenniels verhaltnismassigkeitalsrationaliatskontrolle AT petersenniels proportionalityandjudicialactivismfundamentalrightsadjudicationincanadagermanyandsouthafrica |