| Acknowledgments |
|
v | |
|
|
|
xiii | |
|
1 Introduction: Highest Courts in Flux |
|
|
1 | (13) |
|
I The Trend of Judicial Internationalisation |
|
|
2 | (1) |
|
II Why Do Judges Cite Foreign Law? |
|
|
3 | (3) |
|
III Learning from the Views of Judges |
|
|
6 | (2) |
|
|
|
8 | (2) |
|
|
|
10 | (4) |
|
2 Understanding the Development of Highest Courts' Practices: A Constitutional-Theoretical Approach |
|
|
14 | (22) |
|
I Constitutional Theory and Legal Evolution |
|
|
16 | (4) |
|
A Understanding Legal Evolution through Constitutional Theory |
|
|
16 | (2) |
|
B Concept of `Constitutional (In-)Flexibility' |
|
|
18 | (2) |
|
II Procedural Aspects of Legal Evolution |
|
|
20 | (8) |
|
A Detail of Constitutional Norms |
|
|
20 | (1) |
|
B Modalities for Revision of the Constitution |
|
|
21 | (3) |
|
C Approach of the Interpreter of the Constitution |
|
|
24 | (2) |
|
D Impact of International Law in the Domestic Legal System |
|
|
26 | (2) |
|
III Substantive Aspects of Legal Evolution |
|
|
28 | (7) |
|
A Democratic Justification of Judicial Decisions |
|
|
28 | (1) |
|
(i) Authority of the Consulted Sources |
|
|
29 | (2) |
|
(ii) Nature of the Judicial Competence |
|
|
31 | (1) |
|
|
|
32 | (2) |
|
|
|
34 | (1) |
|
D Effectiveness and Efficiency of Judicial Decision-Making |
|
|
34 | (1) |
|
|
|
35 | (1) |
|
3 Introducing the Comparative and Empirical Analysis |
|
|
36 | (32) |
|
I Anglo-Saxon Model: A Single Highest Court (United Kingdom, Canada, United States) |
|
|
36 | (9) |
|
|
|
37 | (1) |
|
|
|
37 | (1) |
|
(ii) Supreme Court of Canada |
|
|
37 | (1) |
|
|
|
38 | (1) |
|
B Composition: Judges and Staff |
|
|
39 | (1) |
|
|
|
39 | (1) |
|
(ii) Supreme Court of Canada |
|
|
40 | (1) |
|
|
|
41 | (1) |
|
|
|
42 | (1) |
|
|
|
42 | (1) |
|
(ii) Supreme Court of Canada |
|
|
43 | (1) |
|
|
|
44 | (1) |
|
II French Model: Multiple Highest Courts (France, the Netherlands) |
|
|
45 | (14) |
|
|
|
46 | (1) |
|
|
|
46 | (1) |
|
(ii) Supreme Administrative Courts |
|
|
47 | (2) |
|
(iii) Conseil Constitutionnel |
|
|
49 | (2) |
|
B Composition: Judges and Staff |
|
|
51 | (1) |
|
|
|
51 | (1) |
|
(ii) Supreme Administrative Courts |
|
|
52 | (2) |
|
(iii) Conseil Constitutionnel |
|
|
54 | (1) |
|
|
|
55 | (1) |
|
|
|
55 | (2) |
|
(ii) Supreme Administrative Courts |
|
|
57 | (1) |
|
(iii) Conseil Constitutionnel |
|
|
58 | (1) |
|
|
|
59 | (3) |
|
|
|
59 | (2) |
|
|
|
61 | (1) |
|
|
|
61 | (1) |
|
|
|
62 | (5) |
|
|
|
62 | (2) |
|
|
|
64 | (2) |
|
C Other Sources: Case Law, Speeches and Articles |
|
|
66 | (1) |
|
|
|
67 | (1) |
|
4 Incorporating the Transnational: Judicial Roles, Relations and Working Methods in a Globalised World |
|
|
68 | (71) |
|
I Judicial Roles in a Globalised World |
|
|
69 | (14) |
|
|
|
69 | (1) |
|
(i) Ensuring the Uniform Application of the Law |
|
|
69 | (7) |
|
(ii) Ensuring the Protection of Fundamental Rights |
|
|
76 | (2) |
|
|
|
78 | (1) |
|
(i) Judicial Authority and Autonomy in a Globalised World |
|
|
78 | (2) |
|
(ii) Horizontal Dialogue: Leadership amongst One's Peers |
|
|
80 | (1) |
|
(iii) Vertical Dialogue: Leadership vis-a-vis the European Courts |
|
|
80 | (2) |
|
|
|
82 | (1) |
|
II International Relations of the Highest Courts |
|
|
83 | (30) |
|
A Judicial Networks and Exchanges |
|
|
83 | (1) |
|
|
|
84 | (1) |
|
(ii) Supreme Court of Canada |
|
|
85 | (3) |
|
|
|
88 | (2) |
|
(iv) French Highest Courts |
|
|
90 | (5) |
|
|
|
95 | (3) |
|
B Individual Views Concerning Globalisation |
|
|
98 | (1) |
|
(i) Involvement in Debate About Globalisation |
|
|
99 | (3) |
|
(ii) Influence of `Globalist' and `Localist' Mind-Sets of Judges |
|
|
102 | (4) |
|
|
|
106 | (1) |
|
|
|
107 | (2) |
|
C National Judges in International Courts |
|
|
109 | (3) |
|
|
|
112 | (1) |
|
III Working Methods in a Globalised World |
|
|
113 | (24) |
|
A Internal Research of International and Comparative Law |
|
|
114 | (1) |
|
|
|
114 | (1) |
|
(ii) Supreme Court of Canada |
|
|
115 | (1) |
|
|
|
116 | (1) |
|
(iv) French Highest Courts |
|
|
116 | (1) |
|
|
|
117 | (3) |
|
B Role of Counsel, Amid Curiae and Interveners |
|
|
120 | (1) |
|
|
|
120 | (1) |
|
(ii) Supreme Court of Canada |
|
|
121 | (1) |
|
|
|
122 | (1) |
|
(iv) French Highest Courts |
|
|
123 | (1) |
|
|
|
123 | (1) |
|
|
|
124 | (1) |
|
|
|
124 | (1) |
|
(ii) Supreme Court of Canada |
|
|
125 | (1) |
|
|
|
126 | (1) |
|
(iv) French Highest Courts |
|
|
127 | (1) |
|
|
|
128 | (1) |
|
|
|
129 | (1) |
|
|
|
129 | (1) |
|
(ii) Supreme Court of Canada |
|
|
130 | (1) |
|
|
|
131 | (1) |
|
(iv) French Highest Courts |
|
|
132 | (3) |
|
|
|
135 | (1) |
|
|
|
136 | (1) |
|
|
|
137 | (2) |
|
5 The Use of Foreign Law in Judicial Decision-Making |
|
|
139 | (78) |
|
|
|
140 | (23) |
|
A Impact of International Law |
|
|
141 | (1) |
|
|
|
141 | (3) |
|
(ii) Supreme Court of Canada |
|
|
144 | (1) |
|
|
|
145 | (1) |
|
(iv) French Highest Courts |
|
|
146 | (2) |
|
|
|
148 | (2) |
|
B Role of Comparative Law |
|
|
150 | (1) |
|
|
|
150 | (1) |
|
(ii) Supreme Court of Canada |
|
|
151 | (3) |
|
|
|
154 | (4) |
|
(iv) French Highest Courts |
|
|
158 | (2) |
|
|
|
160 | (1) |
|
|
|
161 | (2) |
|
II Use of Foreign Law: Examples from Case Law |
|
|
163 | (35) |
|
A Use of International Law |
|
|
163 | (1) |
|
|
|
163 | (3) |
|
(ii) Supreme Court of Canada |
|
|
166 | (3) |
|
|
|
169 | (2) |
|
(iv) French Highest Courts |
|
|
171 | (2) |
|
|
|
173 | (5) |
|
|
|
178 | (1) |
|
|
|
178 | (3) |
|
(ii) Supreme Court of Canada |
|
|
181 | (6) |
|
|
|
187 | (3) |
|
(iv) French Highest Courts |
|
|
190 | (4) |
|
|
|
194 | (3) |
|
|
|
197 | (1) |
|
III Justification of Developed Practices |
|
|
198 | (15) |
|
A Judicial Argumentation and the Style of Judgments |
|
|
198 | (1) |
|
(i) Citation of Foreign Legal Materials |
|
|
199 | (1) |
|
(ii) Why Judges Cite Foreign Law |
|
|
200 | (3) |
|
(iii) Methodological Challenges |
|
|
203 | (3) |
|
B Selection of Comparative Legal Materials: Tradition, Language and Prestige |
|
|
206 | (1) |
|
|
|
206 | (1) |
|
(ii) Supreme Court of Canada |
|
|
206 | (3) |
|
|
|
209 | (2) |
|
(iv) French Highest Courts |
|
|
211 | (1) |
|
|
|
212 | (1) |
|
|
|
213 | (1) |
|
|
|
213 | (4) |
|
6 Conclusion: Assessing the Development of Highest Courts' Practices |
|
|
217 | (23) |
|
I Constitutional (In-)Flexibility in Action: Procedural and Substantive Explanations for the Development of Highest Courts' Practices |
|
|
217 | (17) |
|
A Procedural Explanations |
|
|
218 | (1) |
|
(i) Accommodating Change Through Constitutional Norms |
|
|
218 | (5) |
|
(ii) Accommodating Change Through Constitutional Interpretation |
|
|
223 | (4) |
|
B Substantive Explanations |
|
|
227 | (1) |
|
(i) Democratic Justification of Judicial Decisions |
|
|
227 | (3) |
|
(ii) Legal Tradition and the Nature of Cases: Contextual Factors for the Use of Foreign Law |
|
|
230 | (2) |
|
(iii) Effectiveness and Efficiency of Judicial Decision-Making |
|
|
232 | (1) |
|
|
|
233 | (1) |
|
II Epilogue: The Future of Judicial Internationalisation |
|
|
234 | (6) |
|
A Judges' View of the Future |
|
|
234 | (3) |
|
B Possible Scenarios for the Future |
|
|
237 | (3) |
| Annex: Interview Design |
|
240 | (3) |
| Bibliography |
|
243 | (14) |
| Index |
|
257 | |