Loading...

Bills of rights in the common law

"Scholars have addressed at length the 'what' of judicial review under a bill of rights - scrutinizing legislation and striking it down - but neglected the 'how'. Adopting an internal legal perspective, Robert Leckey addresses that gap by reporting on the processes and activ...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Leckey, Robert (Author)
Format: Printed Book
Language:English
Series:Cambridge studies in constitutional law
Subjects:
LEADER 03586cam a2200337 i 4500
001 18390930
003 OSt
005 20170310112247.0
008 141201s2015 enk b 001 0 eng
010 |a  2014046698 
020 |a 9781107680630  
020 |a 9781107038530 
040 |a DLC  |b eng  |c DLC  |e rda 
042 |a pcc 
050 0 0 |a KD5020  |b .L43 2015 
082 0 0 |a 342.085 LEC'15  |2 23 
100 1 |a Leckey, Robert  |e author. 
245 1 0 |a Bills of rights in the common law   |c Robert Leckey 
300 |a xix, 237 pages ;  |c 24 cm. 
490 0 |a Cambridge studies in constitutional law 
504 |a Includes bibliographical references (pages 199-220) and index. 
505 8 |a Machine generated contents note: Introduction; Against Bill of Rights exceptionalism; The common law, judging, and three Bills of Rights; Judicial review of legislation before Bills of Rights; Bills of Rights and other means of accessing judgment; Putting the strike-down in its place; Remedies from text to practice; Improving the system and engaging the legislature; Rethinking remedies and constitutional supremacy; Conclusion. 
520 |a "Scholars have addressed at length the 'what' of judicial review under a bill of rights - scrutinizing legislation and striking it down - but neglected the 'how'. Adopting an internal legal perspective, Robert Leckey addresses that gap by reporting on the processes and activities of judges of the highest courts of Canada, South Africa and the United Kingdom as they apply their relatively new bills of rights. Rejecting the tendency to view rights adjudication as novel and unique, he connects it to the tradition of judging and judicial review in the Commonwealth and identifies respects in which judges' activities in rights cases genuinely are novel - and problematic. Highlighting inventiveness in rights adjudication, including creative remedies and guidance to legislative drafters, he challenges classifications of review as strong or weak. Disputing claims that it is modest and dialogic, he also argues that remedial discretion denies justice to individuals and undermines constitutional supremacy"-- 
520 |a "Scholars have addressed at length the 'what' of judicial review under a bill of rights - scrutinizing legislation and striking it down - but neglected the 'how'. Adopting an internal legal perspective, Robert Leckey addresses that gap by reporting on the processes and activities of judges of the highest courts of Canada, South Africa, and the United Kingdom as they apply their relatively new bills of rights. Rejecting the tendency to view rights adjudication as novel and unique, he connects it to the tradition of judging and judicial review in the Commonwealth and identifies respects in which judges' activities in rights cases genuinely are novel - and problematic. Highlighting inventiveness in rights adjudication, including creative remedies and guidance to legislative drafters, he challenges classifications of review as strong or weak. Disputing claims that it is modest and dialogic, he also argues that remedial discretion denies justice to individuals and undermines constitutional supremacy"-- 
650 0 |a Civil rights  |z Commonwealth countries. 
650 0 |a Common law. 
906 |a 7  |b cbc  |c orignew  |d 1  |e ecip  |f 20  |g y-gencatlg 
942 |2 ddc  |c REF 
955 |b xg06 2014-12-01  |i xg06 2014-12-01 ONIX to Dewey  |a xg16 2015-07-10 1 copy rec'd., to CIP ver. 
999 |c 9956  |d 9956 
952 |0 0  |1 0  |2 ddc  |4 0  |6 342_085000000000000_LEC151  |7 0  |9 19752  |a NUALS  |b NUALS  |c GEN  |d 2017-03-10  |l 0  |o 342.085 LEC'15;1  |p 13343  |r 2017-03-10  |y BK