In a series of stunning decisions handed down in the last few years, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has condemned the decisionmaking procedures traditionally used by the French Supreme Courts (i.e., the Cour de cassation and the Conseil d\u27Etat). This Article traces and critiques this developing “fair trial” jurisprudence, which has also resulted in the condemnation of the supreme courts of Belgium, Portugal, and the Netherlands, whose decisionmaking procedures were all patterned on the French civil law model. Finally, the Article examines the dramatic and schismatic French responses that have ensued. This Article offers a case study at the intersection of European law, comparative law and judicial theory. It begins by describi...
The author analyzed the structure of cassation proceedings in France. He remarked that the French Ca...
In this Article, I explore the question of why constitutional review, but not American judicial revi...
This dissertation explores differences in the willingness of high court judges to use their authorit...
In a series of stunning decisions handed down in the last few years, the European Court of Human Rig...
French High Courts have embraced review of national legislation for conformity with EU law in differ...
What does it mean for a supreme court to “make law”? When is it possible to say that its decisions a...
In this Article, I examine the foundations of American judicial form, in particular the proposition ...
France was sentenced several times by the european court of Human rights in 2010. the court consider...
The supreme courts of France, the Netherlands and Belgium belong historically to the French cassatio...
With the case of Pla and Puncernau versus Andorra on 13 July 2004, the European Court of Human Right...
What does it mean for a supreme court to ‘make law?’ When is it possible to say that its decisions a...
Since its inception, the French jury system has generated controversy and passionate argument. The j...
In this Article, I explore the question of why constitutional review, but not American judicial revi...
This article traces the path from the decision of the European Court of Human Rights in Salduz v Tur...
Mitchel Lasser's Judicial Deliberations compares the argumentative practices of the French Cour de c...
The author analyzed the structure of cassation proceedings in France. He remarked that the French Ca...
In this Article, I explore the question of why constitutional review, but not American judicial revi...
This dissertation explores differences in the willingness of high court judges to use their authorit...
In a series of stunning decisions handed down in the last few years, the European Court of Human Rig...
French High Courts have embraced review of national legislation for conformity with EU law in differ...
What does it mean for a supreme court to “make law”? When is it possible to say that its decisions a...
In this Article, I examine the foundations of American judicial form, in particular the proposition ...
France was sentenced several times by the european court of Human rights in 2010. the court consider...
The supreme courts of France, the Netherlands and Belgium belong historically to the French cassatio...
With the case of Pla and Puncernau versus Andorra on 13 July 2004, the European Court of Human Right...
What does it mean for a supreme court to ‘make law?’ When is it possible to say that its decisions a...
Since its inception, the French jury system has generated controversy and passionate argument. The j...
In this Article, I explore the question of why constitutional review, but not American judicial revi...
This article traces the path from the decision of the European Court of Human Rights in Salduz v Tur...
Mitchel Lasser's Judicial Deliberations compares the argumentative practices of the French Cour de c...
The author analyzed the structure of cassation proceedings in France. He remarked that the French Ca...
In this Article, I explore the question of why constitutional review, but not American judicial revi...
This dissertation explores differences in the willingness of high court judges to use their authorit...