oru.sePublikationer
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Dissenting opinions in constitutional courts
Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-3141-4954
2014 (English)In: Juridicums Årsbok 2011-2013 / [ed] Catharina Calleman, Örebro: Örebro University , 2014, 201-227 p.Chapter in book (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

Although long considered alien to the civil law tradition, the publication of separate dissenting or concurring opinions is now permitted by the majority of European constitutional courts, the only exceptions being the Austrian, Belgian, French, Italian, and Luxembourgish constitutional courts. The decades-long history of dissenting opinions in the practice of several European constitutional courts calls for an analysis.  While there is an extensive literature in the United States regarding the use of dissenting opinions, comprehensive empirical research is still absent in Europe.  American scholars have conducted research from several different points of view. Legal scholars have dealt primarily with the relationship between dissenting opinions and the doctrine of binding precedent, and have tried to solve the problem of the precedential value of plurality decisions, e.g. decisions lacking a reasoning shared by the majority of the judges.  Political scientists, for their part, have studied the policy-making role of judges and strategic opinion-writing.  Scholars of law and economics have analyzed the costs and benefits of writing separately.  Even judges themselves have often expressed their own thoughts in essays or conference speeches on the matter.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Örebro: Örebro University , 2014. 201-227 p.
Keyword [en]
Judicial dissent, Judicial decision-making, Constitutional courts, Judicial independence, Transparency
National Category
Law and Society
Research subject
Legal Science
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-44828ISBN: 978-91-7668-990-5 (print)OAI: oai:DiVA.org:oru-44828DiVA: diva2:816531
Note

Denna text har tidigare publicerats i German Law Journal, Vol. 14, No. 8 (Special Issue: Constitutional Reasoning), p. 1345-1371

Available from: 2015-06-03 Created: 2015-06-03 Last updated: 2017-10-17Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Kelemen [ Capanini-Kelemen ], Katalin
By organisation
School of Law, Psychology and Social Work
Law and Society

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

Total: 249 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf