Cover des Buchs: Zwischen politischer und rechtlicher Verfassung
Im Shop erwerben
, um zu prüfen, ob Sie einen Vollzugriff auf diese Publikation haben.
Monographie Kein Zugriff

Zwischen politischer und rechtlicher Verfassung

Hybridisierung der britischen Verfassung durch den UK Supreme Court?
Autor:innen:
Verlag:
 2024

Zusammenfassung

Im Jahr 2009 nahm der Supreme Court of the United Kingdom (UKSC) seine Arbeit als höchstes Gericht des Vereinigten Königreichs auf und verhandelte seither die prestigeträchtigsten und verfassungsrechtlich relevantesten Fälle. Während sich die Gerichte zunächst in ihre neue Rolle als oberste Richter des Landes einfinden mussten, hatten ihre Urteile schon von Beginn an großen Einfluss auf die „ungeschriebene“ Verfassung des UK und das Gleichgewicht der Gewalten im „Separation of Powers Game“. Zunächst werden die historischen, rechtlichen wie auch politischen Rahmenbedingungen erläutert, daran anknüpfend werden die bedeutsamsten Fälle von 2009 bis 2019 analysiert und im Spannungsfeld zwischen politischer und rechtlicher Verfassung verortet.

Schlagworte

Publikation durchsuchen

Bibliographische Angaben

Copyrightjahr
2024
ISBN-Print
978-3-7560-0944-2
ISBN-Online
978-3-7489-4609-0
Verlag
Nomos, Baden-Baden
Reihe
Politik und Recht
Sprache
Deutsch
Seiten
522
Produkttyp
Monographie

Inhaltsverzeichnis

KapitelSeiten
  1. Titelei/Inhaltsverzeichnis Kein Zugriff 1 - 18
  2. 1 Einleitung Kein Zugriff 19 - 32
      1. 2.1.1 Akteure und Agency Kein Zugriff
      2. 2.1.2 Die Idee als Keimzelle der Identitätsfindung Kein Zugriff
      3. 2.1.3 Institutioneller Wandel und „Critical Junctures“ Kein Zugriff
    2. 2.2 Historisch-konstruktivistischer Institutionalismus Kein Zugriff
      1. 3.1.1 Verfassung und Konstitutionalismus Kein Zugriff
      2. 3.1.2 Verfassungsgerichte und Supreme Courts Kein Zugriff
      3. 3.1.3 Judicialization – Agency und Wandel von Verfassungsgerichten Kein Zugriff
        1. 3.1.4.1 Begriffsannährung an den Judicial Self-Restraint Kein Zugriff
        2. 3.1.4.2 Endogene Faktoren Kein Zugriff
        3. 3.1.4.3 Exogene Faktoren Kein Zugriff
        4. 3.1.4.4 Context matters Kein Zugriff
      5. 3.1.5 Doctrine Buildung als Fundament des modernen Common Law Kein Zugriff
      1. 3.2.1 Wandel des Common Law vom 17. Jahrhundert bis zur Moderne Kein Zugriff
      2. 3.2.2 Parlamentssouveränität, Rule of Law und Konventionen Kein Zugriff
        1. 3.2.3.1 The European Communities Act 1972 Kein Zugriff
        2. 3.2.3.2 Human Rights Act 1998 Kein Zugriff
        3. 3.2.3.3 Scotland Act & Government of Wales Act and Northern Ireland Act 1998 Kein Zugriff
      4. 3.2.4 Separation of Powers in der ungeschriebenen Verfassung des Vereinigten Königreiches Kein Zugriff
      5. 3.2.5 Der Common Law Constitutionalism als britische Variante zwischen rechtlicher und politischer Verfassung Kein Zugriff
    1. 4.1 Reform der Position des Lord Chancellor Kein Zugriff
    2. 4.2 Der Supreme Court of the United Kingdom Kein Zugriff
    1. 5.1 Fallauswahl und Methodik Kein Zugriff
      1. 5.2.1 R v Horncastle & Others [2009] UKSC 14 Kein Zugriff
      2. 5.2.2 R v Governing Body of JFS and the Admissions Appeal Panel of JFS and others [2009] UKSC 15 Kein Zugriff
      3. 5.2.3 Her Majesty’s Treasury v Mohammed Jabar Ahmed and others [2010] UKSC 1, UKSC 2, UKSC 5 Kein Zugriff
      4. 5.2.4 Norris v Government of the United States of America and another [2010] UKSC 9 Kein Zugriff
      5. 5.2.5 Cadder v Her Majesty’s Advocate (Scotland) [2010] UKSC 43 Kein Zugriff
      6. 5.2.6 Manchester City Council v Pinnock [2010] UKSC 45 Kein Zugriff
      7. 5.2.7 R v Chaytor and others [2010] UKSC 52 Kein Zugriff
      8. 5.2.8 R (on the application of Cart) v The Upper Tribunal [2011] UKSC 28 Kein Zugriff
      9. 5.2.9 AXA General Insurance Limited and others v The Lord Advocate and others (Scotland) [2011] UKSC 46 Kein Zugriff
      10. 5.2.10 Zwischenfazit für die Konstituierungsphase des UKSC Kein Zugriff
      1. 5.3.1 Assange v The Swedish Prosecution Authority [2012] UKSC 22 Kein Zugriff
      2. 5.3.2 Bank Mellat v HM Treasury No.1 [2013] UKSC 38 & No. 2 [2013] UKSC 39 Kein Zugriff
      3. 5.3.3 Smith and others v The Ministry of Defence [2013] UKSC 41 Kein Zugriff
      4. 5.3.4 R (on the application of Chester) v Secretary of State for Justice [2013] UKSC 63 Kein Zugriff
      5. 5.3.5 R (on the application on HS2 Action Alliance Limited) v The Secretary of State for Transport and another [2014] UKSC 3 Kein Zugriff
      6. 5.3.6 Kennedy v The Charity Commission [2014] UKSC 20 Kein Zugriff
      7. 5.3.7 R (on the application of Nicklinson and others) v Ministry of Justice [2014] UKSC 38 Kein Zugriff
      8. 5.3.8 Pham v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2015] UKSC 19 Kein Zugriff
      9. 5.3.9 R (Evans) v Attorney General [2015] UKSC 21 Kein Zugriff
      10. 5.3.10 Zwischenfazit für die Konsolidierungsphase Kein Zugriff
      1. 5.4.1 Patel v Mirza [2016] UKSC 42 Kein Zugriff
      2. 5.4.2 Abd Ali Hameed Al-Waheed v Ministry of Defence [2017] UKSC 2 Kein Zugriff
      3. 5.4.3 R (on the application of Miller and others) v Secretary of State for Existing the European Union [2017] UKSC 5 Kein Zugriff
      4. 5.4.4 R (on the application of UNISON) v Lord Chancellor [2017] UKSC 51 Kein Zugriff
      5. 5.4.5 R (on the application of Black) v Secretary of State for Justice [2017] UKSC 81 Kein Zugriff
      6. 5.4.6 In the matter of an application by the Northern Ireland Human Rights Comission’s for Judicial Review [2018] UKSC 27 Kein Zugriff
      7. 5.4.7 Owens v Owens [2018] UKSC 41 Kein Zugriff
      8. 5.4.8 In the matter of an application by Geraldine Finucane for Judicial Review [2019] UKSC 7 Kein Zugriff
      9. 5.4.9 R (on the application of Miller) v The Prime Minister, Cherry and others v Advocate General for Scotland (Scotland) [2019] UKSC 41 Kein Zugriff
      10. 5.4.10 Zwischenfazit für die Konfrontationsphase Kein Zugriff
    1. 6.1 Institutioneller Wandel Kein Zugriff
    2. 6.2 Personeller Wandel Kein Zugriff
    3. 6.3 Doktrineller Wandel Kein Zugriff
  8. 7 Konklusion: Der UKSC als Gestalter und Bewahrer der hybridisierten britischen Verfassung Kein Zugriff 449 - 464
  9. 8 Schluss Kein Zugriff 465 - 480
  10. 9 Literaturverzeichnis Kein Zugriff 481 - 514
  11. 10 Anhang Kein Zugriff 515 - 522

Literaturverzeichnis (560)

  1. Ackerman, Bruce, We The People: Foundations, Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1991. Google Scholar öffnen
  2. Ackerman, Bruce, Revolutionary Constitutions. Charismatic Leadership and the Rule of Law. Cambridge, MA, London, England: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2019. Google Scholar öffnen
  3. Action on Smoking and Health, Briefing: The implementation of smokefree prisons in England and Wales, 26.11.2018, online unter: https://ash.org.uk/uploads/ASH-smokefree-prisons-briefing-26-November-2018.pdf?v=1648144096, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  4. Ahmed, Farrah, Perry, Adam, Constitutional Statutes, Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 37, No. 2, 2017, S. 461–481. Google Scholar öffnen
  5. Albert, Richard, Stacey, Richard (Hrsg.) The Limits and Legitimacy of Referendums, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2022. Google Scholar öffnen
  6. Allan, T.R.S., Human Rights and Judicial Review: A Critique of ʻDue Deferenceʻ, The Cambridge Law Journal, Vol 65., Issue 2, 2006, S. 671–695. Google Scholar öffnen
  7. Allan, T.R.S., Deference, Defiance, and Doctrine: Defining the Limits of Judicial Review, The University of Toronto Law Journal, Vol. 60, Issue 1, 2010, S. 41–59. Google Scholar öffnen
  8. Allan, T.R.S., The Rule of Law, Parliamentary Sovereignty, and a Ministerial Veto Over Judicial Decisions, The Cambridge Law Journal, Vol. 74, Part 3, 2015, S. 385–388. Google Scholar öffnen
  9. Allan, T.R.S., Principle, Practice, and Precedent: Vindicating Justice, According to Law, The Cambridge Law Journal, Vol. 77, Issue 2, 2018, S. 269–297. Google Scholar öffnen
  10. Allison, J. W. F., An Introduction to the Historical Constitutionalism of the English Common Law, in: Ehlers, Dirk, Glaser, Henning, Prokati, Kittisak (Hrsg.) Constitutionalism and Good Governance. Eastern and Western Perspectives. 1. Aufl. Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2014, S. 127–140. Google Scholar öffnen
  11. Amato, Giuliano, Barbsian, Benedetta, Pinelli, Cesare (Hrsg.) Rule of Law vs Majoritarian Democracy, Oxford [u.a.]: Hart Publishing, 2021. Google Scholar öffnen
  12. Annan, Kofi, Kofi Annan’s statement at the special meeting of the Security Council’s Counter-Terrorism Committee, 06.03.2003, United Nations Secretary-General, online unter: https://www.un.org/sg/en/content/sg/speeches/2003-03-06/kofi-annans-statement-special-meeting-security-council%E2%80%99s-counter (abgerufen am 14.08.2024). Google Scholar öffnen
  13. Aroney, Nicholas, R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union: Three Competing Syllogisms, The Modern Law Review, Vol. 80, Issue 4, 2017, S. 726–745. Google Scholar öffnen
  14. Arvind, T. T., Stirton, Lindsay, Legal ideology, legal doctrine and the UK’s top judges, Public Law, 2016 (July), S. 418–436. Google Scholar öffnen
  15. Barak, Aharon, Proportionality. Constitutional Rights and their Limitations. Cambridge [u.a.]: Cambridge University Press, 2012. Google Scholar öffnen
  16. Barendt, Eric, An introduction to Constitutional Law. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998. Google Scholar öffnen
  17. Beatson, Jack, Key Ideas in Law: The Rule of Law and the Separation of Powers, Oxford [u.a.]: Hart Publishing, 2021. Google Scholar öffnen
  18. Been Chen Goh, Law Without Lawyers, Justice Without Courts. On Traditional Chinese Mediation, first published 2002 by Ashgate Publishing, Oxford; New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group. Google Scholar öffnen
  19. Bell, Joanna, Digging for Information about Cart JRs, U.K. Const. L. Blog, 01.04.2021, online unter https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  20. Bell, Stephen, Do We Really Need a New ‘Constructivist Institutionalism’ to Explain Institutional Change?, British Journal of Political Science, Vol. 41, Issue 4, 2011, S. 883–906. Google Scholar öffnen
  21. Bellamy, Richard, Political Constitutionalism. A Republican Defence of the Constitutionality of Democracy. Cambridge [u.a.]: Cambridge University Press, 2007. Google Scholar öffnen
  22. Bellamy, Richard, Political constitutionalism and the Human Rights Act, International Journal of Constitutional Law, Vol. 9, No. 1, 2011, S. 86–111. Google Scholar öffnen
  23. Beukes, Margaret, Who qualifies as ‘judicial authority’ for the purpose of extradition?, South African Yearbook of International Law, Vol. 38, No. 1, 2013, S. 227- 253. Google Scholar öffnen
  24. Bickel, Alexander M., The Least Dangerous Branch: The Supreme Court at the Bar of Politics, 2. Auflage, New Haven, CT, [u.a.]: Yale University Press, 1986. Google Scholar öffnen
  25. Biggar, Nigel, What’s Wrong with Rights? Al-Skeini, Al-Jedda, Smith and the Fog of War, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2020. Google Scholar öffnen
  26. Bill of Rights [1688] 1688 Chapter 2 1 Will and Mar Sess 2, Introductory Text, online unter: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/aep/WillandMarSess2/1/2/introduction, abgerufen 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  27. Birkinshaw, Patrick, The United Kingdom in Europe and Europe in the United Kingdom – an Indelible Influence?, in: Becker, Ulrich, Hatje, Armin, Potacs, Michael, Wunderlich, Nina (Hrsg.) Verfassung und Verwaltung in Europa. Festschrift für Jürgen Schwarze zum 70. Geburtstag. Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2014, S. 19–42. Google Scholar öffnen
  28. Bjorge, Eirik, National supreme courts and the development of ECHR rights, International Journal of Constitutional Law, 2011, Vol. 9, No. 1, S. 5–31. Google Scholar öffnen
  29. Blackstone, William, Commentaries on the Laws of England 17th ed (1814), Vol. 1, Book 1. Google Scholar öffnen
  30. Blick, Andrew, Brexit and the British Constitution, in: Loussouarn, Sophie (Hrsg.) Brexit and its Aftermath, London [u.a.]: Bloomsbury Academic, 2022, S. 13–27. Google Scholar öffnen
  31. Blom-Cooper, Louis, Dickson, Brice, Drewry, Gavin, The first year of the UK’S Supreme Court, Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly, Vol. 61, No. 4, 2010, S. 295–310. Google Scholar öffnen
  32. Bloom, Anne, The “Post-Attitudinal Moment”: Judicial Policymaking Through the Lens of New Institutionalism, Law & Society Review, Vol. 35, Issue 1, 2001, S. 219–230. Google Scholar öffnen
  33. Blyth, Mark. M., Any More Bright Ideas?, Comparative Politics, Vol. 29, No. 2, 1997, S. 229–250. Google Scholar öffnen
  34. Bogdanor, Vernon, The New British Constitution, Oxford and Portland, Oregon: Hart Publishing, 2009. Google Scholar öffnen
  35. Bogdanor, Vernon, Beyond Brexit. Towards a British Constitution, London [u.a]: I.B. Tauris, 2019. Google Scholar öffnen
  36. Bogg, Alan, The Common Law Constitution at Work: R (on the application of UNISON) v Lord Chancellor, The Modern Law Review, Vol. 81, Issue 3, 2018, S. 509–538. Google Scholar öffnen
  37. Bognetti, Giovanni, Sistemi giuridici comparati, in: Enciclopedia delle scienze sociali, VIII, Roma, 1998, S. 44–56. Google Scholar öffnen
  38. Boulanger, Christian, The Comparative Sociology of Legal Doctrine: Thoughts on a Research Program, German Law Journal, Vol. 21, Special Issue 7: Socio-Legal Studies in Germany and the UK: Theory and Methods, 2020, S. 1362–1377. Google Scholar öffnen
  39. Bowcott, Owen, Cameron’s pledge to scrap Human Rights Act angers civil rights groups, The Guardian, 01.10.2014, online unter: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/oct/01/cameron-pledge-scrap-human-rights-act-civil-rights-groups abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  40. Bowcott, Owen, Supreme Court to hear claims suspension of parliament as unlawful, The Guardian, 16.09.2019, online unter: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/sep/16/supreme-court-to-hear-claims-suspension-of-parliament-is-unlawful, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  41. Bowcott, Owen, After 10 years, the supreme court is confident in its role, The Guardian, 26.09.2019, Online: https://www.theguardian.com/law/2019/sep/26/after-10-years-the-supreme-court-is-confident-in-its-role, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  42. Breeze, Ruth, “Enemies of the people”: Populist performances in the Daily Mail reporting of the Article 50 case, Discourse, Context & Media, Vol. 25, 2018, S. 60–67. Google Scholar öffnen
  43. British Broadcasting Corporation, Attacks on judges undermine law – Supreme Court president, 16.02.2017, online unter: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-38986228, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  44. British Broadcasting Corporation, Julian Assange denied permission to appeal against extradition, BBC online, 14.03.2022, online unter: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-60743322, abgerufen am 14.08.2024 Google Scholar öffnen
  45. Brown, Nathan J., Waller, Julian G., Constitutional Courts and political uncertainty: Constitutional ruptures and the rule of judges, International Journal of Constitutional Law, Vol. 14, Issue 4, 1 October 2016, 817–850. Google Scholar öffnen
  46. Burrows, Andrew, Numbers Sitting in The Supreme Court, The Law Quarterly Review, Vol. 129, July 2013, S. 305–309. Google Scholar öffnen
  47. Burrows, Andrew, Illegality after Patel v Mirza, Current Legal Problems, Vol. 70, No. 1, 2017, S. 55–71. Google Scholar öffnen
  48. Burton, Frances, Owens v Owens: A Most Curious Case, Denning Law Journal, Vol. 32, No. 1, 2020, S. 5–23. Google Scholar öffnen
  49. Byass, Andrew, Rights of Access to Information under the Common Law: Kennedy v Charity Commission, Judicial Review, Vol. 19, Issue 3, 2014, S. 180–187. Google Scholar öffnen
  50. Cahill-O’Callaghan, Rachel, Values in the Supreme Court. Decisions, Division and Diversity. Oxford [u.a.]: Hart Publishing, 2020. Google Scholar öffnen
  51. Campbell, David, Marbury v. Madison in the U.K.: Brexit and the Creation of Judicial Supremacy, Cardozo Law Review, Vol. 39, No. 3, February 2018, S. 921–946. Google Scholar öffnen
  52. Campbell, David, Allan, James, Procedural Innovation and the Surreptitious Creation of Judicial Supremacy in the United Kingdom, Journal of Law and Society, Vol. 46, Issue 3, 2019, S. 347–366. Google Scholar öffnen
  53. Campbell, John L., Ideas, Politics, and Public Policy, Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 28, 2002, S. 21–38. Google Scholar öffnen
  54. Capoccia, Giovanni, When Do Institutions “Bite”? Historical Institutionalism and the Politics of Institutional Change, Comparative Political Studies, Vol. 49, Issue 8, 2016, S. 1095–1127. Google Scholar öffnen
  55. Carolan, Eion, The New Separation of Powers. A Theory for the Modern State, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009. Google Scholar öffnen
  56. Carstensen, Martin B., Paradigm man vs. The bricoleur: bricolage as an alternative vision of agency in ideational change, European Political Science Review, Vol. 3, Issue 1, 2011, S. 147–167. Google Scholar öffnen
  57. Carstensen, Martin B., Ideas are Not as Stable as Political Scientists Want Them to Be: A Theory of Incremental Ideational Change, Political Studies, Vol. 59, Issue 3, 2011, S. 596–615. Google Scholar öffnen
  58. Carstensen, Martin B., Schmidt, Vivien A., Power through, over and in ideas: conceptualizing ideational power in discursive institutionalism, Journal of European Public Policy, Vol. 23 Issue 3, 2016, 318–337. Google Scholar öffnen
  59. Catlett, Fred W., The Development of the Doctrine of Stare Decisis and the Extent to Which It Should Be Applied, Washington Law Review, Vol. 21, No. 3, 1946, S. 158–170. Google Scholar öffnen
  60. Celeridad, Paolo O., Marbury v. Madison and R(Miller) v. The Prime Minister: An Attempt at Comparative Constitutional Rhetoric, Philippine Law Journal, Vol. 94, 2021, 1–40. Google Scholar öffnen
  61. Chng, Kenny, ʻGood administrationʼ and the ʻGoodʼ: The normative foundation for the protection of legitimate expectations, Common Law World Review, Vol. 50, Issue 4, 2021, S. 157–179. Google Scholar öffnen
  62. Clarry, Daniel (Hrsg.) The UK Supreme Court Yearbook, Vol. 1: Legal Year 2009–2010, London: Appellate Press, 2018. Google Scholar öffnen
  63. Clarry, Daniel (Hrsg.) The UK Supreme Court Yearbook, Vol. 2: Legal Year 2010–2011, London: Appellate Press, 2018. Google Scholar öffnen
  64. Clarry, Daniel (Hrsg.) The UK Supreme Court Yearbook, Vol. 3: Legal Year 2011–2012, London: Appellate Press, 2018. Google Scholar öffnen
  65. Clarry, Daniel (Hrsg.) The UK Supreme Court Yearbook, Vol. 4: Legal Year 2012–2013, London: Appellate Press, 2018. Google Scholar öffnen
  66. Clarry, Daniel (Hrsg.) The UK Supreme Court Yearbook, Vol. 5: Legal Year 2013–2014, London: Appellate Press, 2018. Google Scholar öffnen
  67. Clarry, Daniel (Hrsg.) The UK Supreme Court Yearbook, Vol. 6: Legal Year 2014–2015, London: Appellate Press, 2018. Google Scholar öffnen
  68. Clarry, Daniel (Hrsg.) The UK Supreme Court Yearbook, Vol. 7: Legal Year 2015–2016, London: Appellate Press, 2018. Google Scholar öffnen
  69. Clarry, Daniel (Hrsg.) The UK Supreme Court Yearbook, Vol. 8: Legal Year 2016–2017, London: Appellate Press, 2018. Google Scholar öffnen
  70. Clarry, Daniel (Hrsg.) The UK Supreme Court Yearbook, Vol. 9: Legal Year 2017–2018, London: Appellate Press, 2019. Google Scholar öffnen
  71. Clarry, Daniel (Hrsg.) The UK Supreme Court Yearbook, Vol. 10: Legal Year 2018–2019, London: Appellate Press, 2021. Google Scholar öffnen
  72. Coggon, John, Lord Sumption and the values of life, liberty and security: before and since the COVID-19 outbreak, Journal of Medical Ethics, Vol. 48, Issue 10, 2022, S. 779–784. Google Scholar öffnen
  73. Collier, R. B., Collier, D., Shaping the Political Arena: Critical Junctures, the Labor Movement and Regime Dynamics in Latin America. Princeton: Princeton University, 1991. Google Scholar öffnen
  74. Constitutional Law Matters Project, 2024, online unter https://constitutionallawmatters.org/, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  75. Coombes, Karinne, Roughley, Fiona, Human Rights, in: Clarry, Daniel (Hrsg.) The UK Supreme Court Yearbook, Vol. 1: Legal Year 2009–2010, London: Appellate Press, 2018, S. 42–51. Google Scholar öffnen
  76. Cornell Law School, stare decisis, Legal Information Institute, 2024, online unter: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/stare_decisis, abgerufen am 09.01.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  77. Cornell Law School, sua sponte, Legal Information Institute, 2024, online unter: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/sua_sponte, abgerufen am 09.01.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  78. Craig, Paul, Constitutionalizing constitutional law: HS2, Public Law, 2014 (July), S. 373–392. Google Scholar öffnen
  79. Craig, Paul, Judicial Power, the Judicial Power Project and the UK, University of Queensland Law Journal, Vol. 36, No. 2, 2017, S. 355–374. Google Scholar öffnen
  80. Craig, Paul, The Supreme Court, Prorogation and Constitutional Principle, Public Law, April 2020, Issue 2, S. 248–277. Google Scholar öffnen
  81. Craig, Paul, Constitutionality, Convention and Prorogation, in: Clarry, Daniel (Hrsg.) The UK Supreme Court Yearbook, Vol. 10: Legal Year 2018–2019, London: Appellate Press, 2021, S. 331–356. Google Scholar öffnen
  82. Craig, Paul, De Búrca, Gráinne, EU Law: Text, Cases and Materials, 5. Auflage, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011. Google Scholar öffnen
  83. Craig, Robert, Ouster clauses, separation of powers and the intention of Parliament: from Anisminic to Privacy international, Public Law, Vol. 4, 2018, S. 570–584, online unter: https://dro.dur.ac.uk/27272/1/27272.pdf?DDD19+dla4jap, abgerufen am: 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  84. Cranmer, Frank, Who is a Jew? Jewish faith schools and the Race Relations Act 1976. Cardiff University, Centre for Law and Religion, 2010, online unter: https://archive.jpr.org.uk/object-uk492, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  85. Cross, Frank, Judicial Independence, in: Whittington, Keith E., Keleman, R. Daniel, Caldeira, Gregory A. (Hrsg.) The Oxford Handbook of Law and Politics, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008, S. 557–575. Google Scholar öffnen
  86. Daily Telegraph, The judges versus the people, 04.11.2016. Google Scholar öffnen
  87. Daly, Paul (Hrsg.) Apex Courts and the Common Law, Toronto: Toronto University Press, 2019. Google Scholar öffnen
  88. Daly, Paul, The Legal and Political Constitutions Collide: R. (Evans) v. Attorney General, [2015] UKSC 21, 02.04.2015, Administrative Law Matters, online unter: https://www.administrativelawmatters.com/blog/2015/04/02/the-legal-and-political-constitutions-collide-r-evans-v-attorney-general-2015-uksc-21/, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  89. Daly, Paul, A Critical Analysis of the Case of Prorogations, The Canadian Journal of Comparative and Contemporary Law, Vol. 7, No. 1, 2021, S. 256–292. Google Scholar öffnen
  90. Darbyshire, Penny, Sitting in Judgment. The Working Lives of Judges, Oxford and Portland, Oregon: Hart Publishing, 2011. Google Scholar öffnen
  91. Darbyshire, Penny, Darbyshire on the English Legal Sytem, 11th Edition, London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2014. Google Scholar öffnen
  92. Davies, Caroline, Murphy, Simon, Gayle, Damien, Julian Assange faces US extradition after arrest at Ecuadorian embassy, The Guardian, 11.04.2019, online unter: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/apr/11/julian-assange-arrested-at-ecuadorian-embassy-wikileaks, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  93. Delaney, Erin F., Judiciary Rising: Constitutional Change in the United Kingdom, Northwestern University Law Review, Vol. 108, No. 2, 2015, S. 543–605. Google Scholar öffnen
  94. Delaney, Erin F., Brexit Optimism and British Constitutional Renewal, in: Graber, Mark, Levinson Sanford, Tushnet, Mark (Hrsg.) Constitutional Democracy in Crisis, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018, S. 191–214. Google Scholar öffnen
  95. Demirkol, Berk, Debusmann, Martin Eduard, Hagel, Meredith, Lee, Yin Harn, Ramakrishnan, Sneha, Sliwka, Christoph Karl, 2018, The UK Supreme Court Reviewed, in: Clarry, Daniel (Hrsg.) The UK Supreme Court Yearbook, Vol. 1: Legal Year 2009–2010, London: Appellate Press, S. 18–36. Google Scholar öffnen
  96. Devey, Joseph (Hrsg.) Novum Organum by Lord Bacon. 1902, New York: P.F. Collier & Son, online unter: https://oll-resources.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/oll3/store/titles/1432/0415_Bk.pdf, abgerufen am 14.08.2024, S. 76) Google Scholar öffnen
  97. Dicey, Albert Venn, Introduction to the study of the law of the constitution. Reprint of the 8. ed. publ. by Macmillan in 1915. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund (A Liberty classics edition), 1982. Google Scholar öffnen
  98. Dicey, Albert Venn, England’s Case Against Home Rule, The Project Gutenberg, 2005, online: https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/14886/pg14886-images.html, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  99. Dickson, Brice, If the Human Rights Act were repealed, could the common law fill the void?, 27.11.2013, Oxford Human Rights Hub, online unter: https://ohrh.law.ox.ac.uk/if-the-human-rights-act-were-repealed-could-the-common-law-fill-the-void/ abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  100. Dickson, Brice, Activism and Restraint within the UK Supreme Court, European Journal of Current Legal Issues, Vol. 21, No. 1, 2015, online unter: https://pureadmin.qub.ac.uk/ws/portalfiles/portal/15763221/Activism_and_Restraint_within_the_UK_Supreme_Court.pdf, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  101. Dieter Grimm, Die Zukunft der Verfassung II. Auswirkungen von Europäisierung und Globalisierung, Berlin: Suhrkamp Verlag, 2012. Google Scholar öffnen
  102. Dixon, Owen, The Law and the Constitution, Law Quarterly Review, 1935, Vol. 51, S. 590–614. Google Scholar öffnen
  103. Dixon, Rosalind, Landau, David, Abusive Constitutional Borrowing. Legal Globalization and the Subversion of Liberal Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2021. Google Scholar öffnen
  104. Du-Bois Pedain, The Right to Family Life in Extradition Cases: More Defendant-Friendly than Strasbourg requires, The Cambridge Law Journal, 2010, Vol. 69, Issue 2, S. 223–225. Google Scholar öffnen
  105. Dyzenhaus, David, The Constitution of Law: Legality in a Time of Emergency, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006. Google Scholar öffnen
  106. Edlin, Douglas, Will Britain have a Marbury?, UK Constitutional Blog, 07.06.2013, online unter: http://ukconstitutionallaw.org (abgerufen am 14.08.2024). Google Scholar öffnen
  107. Edwards, Denis, HS2: The First Spike, Journal of Environmental Law, Vol. 26, Issue 2, 2014, S. 319–329. Google Scholar öffnen
  108. Ekins, Richard, The Constitutional Dynamics of Brexit, Notre Dame Journal of International & Comparative Law, Vol. 12, Issue 1, 2022, S. 46–74. Google Scholar öffnen
  109. Ekins, Richard, Abolishing the Supreme Court: some questions and comments, in: Wyatt, Derrick, Ekins, Richard, Reforming the Supreme Court, Policy Exchange, 31.07.2020, online unter: https://policyexchange.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/Reforming-the-Supreme-Court.pdf, abgerufen am 14.08.2024, S. 13–18, S. 14. Google Scholar öffnen
  110. Ekins, Richard, Forsyth, Christopher, Judging the Public Interest. The rule of law vs. the rule of courts. Policy Exchange. Judicial Power Project, 2016, online unter: https://policyexchange.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/judging-the-public-interest.pdf, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  111. Ekins, Richard, Gee, Graham, Reforming the Lord Chancellor’s Role in Senior Judicial Appointments, Policy Exchange, 09.02.2021, online unter: https://policyexchange.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Reforming-the-Lord-Chancellor%E2%80%99s-Role-in-Senior-Judicial-Appointments.pdf, abgerufen am 14.08.2024 Google Scholar öffnen
  112. Ekins, Richard, Morgan, Jonathan, Tugendhat, Tom, Clearing the Fog of Law. Saving our armed forces from defeat by judicial diktat”, Judicial Power Project, 29.03.2015, online unter: https://policyexchange.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/clearing-the-fog-of-law.pdf abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  113. Elliott, E. Donald, Why Our Separation of Powers Jurisprudence Is So Abysmal, The George Washington Law Review, Vol. 57, No. 3, 1989, S. 506–532. Google Scholar öffnen
  114. Elliott, Mark C., United Kingdom: Detention without trial and the ʻwar on terrorʼ, International Journal of Constitutional Law, Vol. 4, No. 3, 2006, S. 553–566. Google Scholar öffnen
  115. Elliott, Mark C., Holyrood, Westminster and Judicial Review Legislation, The Cambridge Law Journal, Vol. 71, Issue 1, March 2012, S. 9–11. Google Scholar öffnen
  116. Elliott, Mark C., Reflections on the HS2 case: a hierarchy of domestic constitutional norms and the qualified primacy of EU law, 02.05.2014, online unter SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2432035, Google Scholar öffnen
  117. Elliott, Mark C., Proportionality and contextualism in common-law review: The Supreme Court’s judgment in Pham, Public Law For Everyone, 17.04.2015, online unter: https://publiclawforeveryone.com/2015/04/17/proportionality-and-contextualism-in-common-law-review-the-supreme-courts-judgment-in-pham/ abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  118. Elliott, Mark C., The Principle of Parliamentary Sovereignty in Legal, Constitutional, and Political Perspective, in: Jowell, Jeffrey, Oliver, Dawn, O’Cinneide, Colm (Hrsg.) The Changing Constitution, 8th Ed., Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015, S. 38–66. Google Scholar öffnen
  119. Elliott, Mark C., A Tangled Constitutional Web: The Black-Spider Memos and the British Constitution's Relational Architecture, Public Law (Forthcoming), University of Cambridge Faculty of Law Research Paper No. 34/2015, 22.06.2015, online unter: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2621451, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  120. Elliott, Mark C., The Supreme Court’s Judgment in Miller: In Search of Constitutional Principle, The Cambridge Law Journal, Vol. 76, Issue 2, July 2017, S. 257–288. Google Scholar öffnen
  121. Elliott, Mark C., Unison in the Supreme Court: Tribunal Fees, Constitutional Rights and the Rule of Law, Public Law For Everyone, 26.07.2017, online unter: https://publiclawforeveryone.com/2017/07/26/unison-in-the-supreme-court-employment-fees-constitutional-rights-and-the-rule-of-law/, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  122. Elliott, Mark C., Through the Looking-Glass? Ouster Clauses, Statutory Interpretation and the British Constitution. Chris Hunt, Lorne Neudorf and Micah Rankin (Hrsg.) Legislating Statutory Interpretation: Perspectives from the Common Law World (Carswell, 2018), University of Cambridge Faculty of Law Research Paper No. 4/2018, 10.01.2018, online unter: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3097074, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  123. Elliott, Mark C., The Rule of Law and Access to Justice: Some Home Truths, The Cambridge Law Journal, Vol. 77, Issue 1, March 2018, S.5 – 8. Google Scholar öffnen
  124. Elliott, Mark C., The Supreme Court’s judgment in Finucane – II: Three unanswered questions concerning the doctrine of legitimate expectation, Public Law For Everyone, 08.03.2019, online unter: https://publiclawforeveryone.com/2019/03/08/the-supreme-courts-judgment-in-finucane-ii-three-unanswered-questions-concerning-the-doctrine-of-legitimate-expectation/, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  125. Emirbayer, Mustafa, Maynard, Douglas W., Pragmatism and Ethnomethodology, Qualitative Sociology, Vol. 34, Issue 1, 2011, S. 221–261. Google Scholar öffnen
  126. Endicott, Timothy, How Judges Make Law, in: Fisher, Elizabeth, King, Jeff, Young, Alison (Hrsg.) The Foundations and Future of Public Law, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2020, S. 127–142. Google Scholar öffnen
  127. Endicott, Timothy, Making Constitutional Principles into Laws, The Law Quarterly Review, Vol. 136, April 2020, S. 175–181. Google Scholar öffnen
  128. Epp, Charles R., The Rights Revolution. Lawyers, Activists, and Supreme Courts in Comparative Perspective, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1998. Google Scholar öffnen
  129. Epstein, Lee, Knight, Jack, The Choices Justices Make, Washington DC: Congressional Quarterly Press, 1998. Google Scholar öffnen
  130. Epstein, Lee, Landes William M., Was There Ever Such a Thing as Judicial Self-Restraint?, California Law Review, Vol. 100, Issue 3, 2012, S. 557–577. Google Scholar öffnen
  131. Epstein, Lee, Segal, Jeffrey, Measuring Issue Salience, American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 44, No. 1, Jan 2000, S. 66–83. Google Scholar öffnen
  132. Epstein, Lee, Walker, Thomas G., 2019, Constitutional Law for a Changing America. Institutional Powers and Constraints, 10th Edition, Washington D.C.: SAGE Publications, 2019. Google Scholar öffnen
  133. Ewing, Keith, Brexit and Parliamentary Sovereignty, The Modern Law Review, Vol. 80, No. 4, 2017, S. 711–726. Google Scholar öffnen
  134. Fabbrini, Federico, Sajó, András, The dangers of constitutional identity, European Law Journal, Vol. 25, Issue 4, 2018, S. 457–473. Google Scholar öffnen
  135. Fairclough, T A, Black Spiders and Public Lawyers: Constitutionalism Revisited?, Judicial Review, Vol. 21, Issue 1, 2016, S. 44–48. Google Scholar öffnen
  136. Febbrajo, Alberto (Hrsg.) Law, Legal Culture and Society. Mirrored Identities of the Legal Order, London, New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, 2019. Google Scholar öffnen
  137. Feeley, Malcolm M., Rubin, Edward L., Judicial Policy Making and the Modern State. How the Courts Reformed America’s Prisons, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. Google Scholar öffnen
  138. Feldman, David, Pulling a Trigger or Starting a Journey? Brexit in the Supreme Court, The Cambridge Law Journal, Vol. 76, Issue 2, July 2017, S. 217–223. Google Scholar öffnen
  139. Fenwick, H., Fenwick, D., The Role of Derogations from the ECHR in the Current “War on Terror”, in: Shor, E., Hoadley, S. (Hrsg.) International Human Rights and Counter-Terrorism. International Human Rights, Singapur: Springer, 2019, S. 259–290. Google Scholar öffnen
  140. Ferguson, Lucinda, Hard Divorces Make Bad Law, Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, 11.04.2017, online unter: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2996981, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  141. Fernandez, Angela, Legal History As The History of Legal Texts, in: Dubber, Markus D., Tomlins, Christopher (Hrsg.) The Oxford Handbook of Legal History. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018, S. 243–260. Google Scholar öffnen
  142. Ferraro, Francesco, Adjudication and Expectations: Bentham on the Role of Judges, Utilitas, Vol. 25, Issue 2, 2013, S. 140–160. Google Scholar öffnen
  143. Ferreira, Nuno, The Supreme Court in a Final Push to go Beyond Strasbourg, Public Law, July 2015, Issue 3, S. 367–375. Google Scholar öffnen
  144. Finnis, John, ʻChanging the Ground Rules’ of Our Constitution, in: Clarry, Daniel (Hrsg.) The UK Supreme Court Yearbook, Vol. 10: Legal Year 2018–2019, London: Appellate Press, 2021, S. 299–330. Google Scholar öffnen
  145. Fioretes, Orfeo, Falleti, Tulia G., Sheingate, Adam, Historical Institutionalism in Political Science, in: dies. (Hrsg.) The Oxford Handbook of Historical Institutionalism, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016, S. 3–28. Google Scholar öffnen
  146. Fisher, James, C., Gray Areas in Tort: Illegality and Authority after Patel v Mirza, The Modern Law Review, Vol. 84, Issue 5, 2021, S. 1122–1136. Google Scholar öffnen
  147. Ford, Michael, Employment Tribunal Feeds and the Rule of Law: R (Unison) v Lord Chancellor in the Supreme Court, Industrial Law Journal, Vol. 47, No. 1, March 2018, S. 1–45. Google Scholar öffnen
  148. Fortin, Marie-France, Revisiting the Application of Statutes to the Crown: A Historical Constitutional Approach, Journal of Commonwealth Law, 2021, Vol. 3, S. 271–329. Google Scholar öffnen
  149. Franco, L., Orleans, L., Roven, C., Thomas, E. (Produktion) Nolan, C. (Regisseur), 2005, Batman Begins [Film], USA: Warner Bros. Entertainment Incorporation. Google Scholar öffnen
  150. Frankfurter, Felix, Mr. Justice Holmes and the Supreme Court, Second Edition, Cambridge, Massachusetts: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1961 (1938). Google Scholar öffnen
  151. Frost, Tom, Abortion in Northern Ireland: Has the Rubicon Been Crossed?, Liverpool Law Review, 39, Issue 1–2, 2018, S. 175–196. Google Scholar öffnen
  152. Fuchs, Gesine, Was ist strategische Prozessführung?, in: Graser, Alexander, Helmrich, Christian (Hrsg.) Strategic Litigation. Begriff und Praxis. Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2019, S. 43–52. Google Scholar öffnen
  153. Fukuyama, Francis, The End of History and the Last Men, New York: Free Press, 1992. Google Scholar öffnen
  154. Ganty, Sarah, Kochenov, Dimitry Vladimirovich, Nugraha, Ignatius Yordan: Constitutional Identity vs. Human Rights: The ECtHR's Bizarre Turn in Three Latvian Cases, Verfassungsblog, 21.12.2023, online unter: https://verfassungsblog.de/constitutional-identity-vs-human-rights/, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  155. Garlicki, Lech, Constitutional courts versus supreme courts, International Journal of Constitutional Law, Vol. 5, Issue 1, 2007, S. 44–68. Google Scholar öffnen
  156. Garrett, Elizabeth, Legislation and Statutory Interpretation, in: Caldeira, Gregory A., Kelemen, R. Daniel, Whittington, Keith E. (Hrsg.) The Oxford Handbook of Law and Politics, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008, S. 360–377. Google Scholar öffnen
  157. Getzler, Joshua, Legal History as Doctrinal History, in: Dubber, Markus D., Tomlins, Christopher (Hrsg.) The Oxford Handbook of Legal History, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018, S. 171–191. Google Scholar öffnen
  158. Giannoulopoulos, Dimitrios, Strasbourg Jurisprudence, Law reform and Comparative Law: A Tale of the Right to Custodial Legal Assistance in Five Countries, Human Rights Law Review, 2016, Vol. 16, Issue 1, 103–129. Google Scholar öffnen
  159. Gibson, Josh, The Chartists and the Constitution: Revisiting British Popular Constitutionalism, Journal of British Studies, Vol. 56, No. 1, 2017, S. 70–90. Google Scholar öffnen
  160. Gidron, Noam, Why Israeli Democracy Is in Crisis, Journal of Democracy, Vol. 34, No. 3, 2023, S. 33–45. Google Scholar öffnen
  161. Giles, Michael W., Blackstone, Bethany, Vining Jr., Richard L., The Supreme Court in American Democracy: Unraveling the Linkages between Public Opinion and Judicial Decision Making, The Journal of Politics, Vol. 70, No. 2, 2008, S. 293–306. Google Scholar öffnen
  162. Gillman, Howard, The Court as an Idea, Not a Building (or a Game): Interpretive Institutionalism and the Analysis of Supreme Court Decision-Making, in: Cornell W. Clayton, Howard Gillman (Hrsg.) Supreme Court Decision-Making. New Institutionalist Approaches, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999. Google Scholar öffnen
  163. Girard, Raphaël, Populism, Executive Power and “Constitutional Impatience”: Courts as Institutional Stabilisers in the United Kingdom, Constitutional Studies (forthcoming in 2022), 06.04.2022, online unter: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3972296, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  164. Gläß, Anne-Christin, Das Bundesverfassungsgericht als „Hüter der Verfassung“ – Zur Rolle und Bedeutung von Verfassungsgerichten in Krisenzeiten, in: Donath, Philipp B.; Bretthauer, Sebastian; Dickel-Görig, Marie; Drehwald, Jennifer; Gourdet, Sascha; Heger, Alexander et al. (Hrsg.) Verfassungen – ihre Rolle im Wandel der Zeit: 59. Assistententagung Öffentliches Recht Frankfurt am Main 2019. Baden-Baden. 1. Aufl.: Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, 2019, S. 263–282. Google Scholar öffnen
  165. Goldsworthy, Jeffrey, Parliamentary Sovereignty’s Premature Obituary, UK Constitutional Law Association, 09.03.2012, online unter: https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2012/03/09/jeffrey-goldsworthy-parliamentary-sovereigntys-premature-obituary/, zuletzt abgerufen am 08.03.2022. Google Scholar öffnen
  166. Goldsworthy, Jeffrey, Losing Faith in Democracy: Why judicial supremacy is rising and what to do about it, 09.03.2015, online unter: https://judicialpowerproject.org.uk/jeffrey-goldsworthy-losing-faith-in-democracy-why-judicial-supremacy-is-rising-and-what-to-do-about-it/, abgerufen am 14.08.2024). Google Scholar öffnen
  167. Goldsworthy, Jeffrey, A Brief History of Constitutional Theory in Britain, The Cambridge Constitutional History of the United Kingdom (Cambridge UP, Forthcoming), 16.10.2020, online unter https://ssrn.com/abstract=3682882, abgerufen am 30.01.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  168. Gore, Will, By branding High Court judges ‘enemies of the people’, the pro-Brexit media proved it’s finally lost touch with reality, Independent, 04.11.2016, online unter: https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-daily-mail-pro-brexit-newspapers-tabloids-enemies-of-the-people-high-court-ruling-lost-touch-reality-a7397251.html, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  169. Goudkamp, James, The End of an Era? Illegality in Private Law in the Supreme Court, 133 Law Quarterly Review, 2017, S. 14–20., Oxford Legal Studies Research Paper No. 51/2016, 20.08.2016, online unter: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2827139, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  170. Graham Gee, Robert Hazell, Kate Malleson, Patrick O’Brien, The Politics of Judicial Independence in the UK’s Changing Constitution, Cambridge MA: Cambridge University Press, 2015. Google Scholar öffnen
  171. Graham, Lewis, The Reed Court by Numbers: How Shallow is the ‘Shallow End’?, U.K. Const. L. Blog, 04.04.2022, online unter: https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  172. Grant, James, The Rise of Juristoracy, The Wilson Quarterly, Vol. 34, No. 2, 2010, S. 16–22. Google Scholar öffnen
  173. Green, Andrew, Picking Up the Slack: Law, Institutions, and Canadian Climate Policy, Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2022. Google Scholar öffnen
  174. Greenhouse, Linda, Siegel, Reva B., Before (and After) Roe v. Wade: New Questions About Backlash, The Yale Law Journal, June 2011, Vol. 120, No. 8, S. 2028–2087. Google Scholar öffnen
  175. Griffith, J.A.G., The Political Constitution, The Modern Law Review, 1979, Vol. 42, No. 1, S. 1–21. Google Scholar öffnen
  176. Grimm, Dieter, Was ist politisch an der Verfassungsgerichtsbarkeit?, ZfP Zeitschrift für Politik Jg. 66, Heft 1, 2019, S. 86–97. Google Scholar öffnen
  177. Haket, Sim, Coherence in the Application of the Duty of Consistent Interpretation of EU Law, Review of European Administrative Law, Vol. 8, No. 2, S. 215–246, S. 235. Google Scholar öffnen
  178. Hall, Peter A., Historical Institutionalism in Rationalist and Sociological Perspective, in: James Mahoney and Kathleen Thelen (Hrsg.) Explaining Institutional Change: Ambiguity, Agency, and Power, London: Cambridge University Press, 2009. Google Scholar öffnen
  179. Hall, Peter A., Taylor, Rosemary C. R., Political Science and the Three New Institutionalisms, Political Studies, Vol. 44, Issue 5, 1996, S. 936–957. Google Scholar öffnen
  180. Hamilton, Alexander, Federalist No. 78, in: Genovese, Michael A. (Hrsg.), The Federalist Papers. Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay, New York: Palgrave Macmillan, S. 235–240. Google Scholar öffnen
  181. Hanretty, Chris, A Court of Specialists. Judicial Behavior in the UK Supreme Court. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2020. Google Scholar öffnen
  182. Harvie-Clark, Sarah, SPICe Briefing. Judicial Review. The Scottish Parliament, 27.06.2022, online unter: https://sp-bpr-en-prod-cdnep.azureedge.net/published/2022/6/27/0ea1f532-8a16-11ea-a4bf-000d3a23af40/SB%2022-35.pdf (abgerufen am 14.08.2024). Google Scholar öffnen
  183. Hay, Colin, Constructivist Institutionalism, in: Rhodes, R. A. W., Binder, Sarah A., Rockman, Bert A. (Hrsg.) The Oxford Handbook of Political Institutions, Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press, 2006, S. 56–74. Google Scholar öffnen
  184. Hay, Colin, Good in a crisis: the ontological institutionalism of social constructivism, New Political Economy, Vol. 21, Issue 6, 2016, S. 520–535. Google Scholar öffnen
  185. Hay, Colin, The Interdependence of Intra- and Inter-Subjectivity in Constructivist Institutionalism, Critical Review, Vol. 29, Issue 2, 2017, S. 235–247. Google Scholar öffnen
  186. Hay, Colin, Wincott, Daniel, Structure, Agency and Historical Institutionalism, Political Studies, Vol. 46, Issue 5, 1998, S. 951–957. Google Scholar öffnen
  187. Hazell, Robert, The Continuing Dynamism of Constitutional Reform, Parliamentary Affairs, Vol. 60, No. 1, 2007, 3–25. Google Scholar öffnen
  188. Heran, Dal, Owens v Owens: time for divorce law to move into the 21st century?, 26.07.2018, online unter: https://www.wrighthassall.co.uk/knowledge-base/owens-v-owens-time-for-divorce-law-to-move-into-the-21st-century, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  189. Hirschl, Ran, The New Constitution and the Judicialization of Pure Politics Worldwide, Fordham Law Review, Vol. 75, Issue 2, 2006, S. 721–753. Google Scholar öffnen
  190. Hirschl, Ran, Towards Juristocracy: The origins and consequences of the new constitutionalism, Cambridge, Massaschusetts: Harvard University Press, 2007. Google Scholar öffnen
  191. Hirschl, Ran, The Judicialization of Mega-Politcs and the Rise of Political Courts, Annual Review of Political Science, Vol. 11, 2008, S. 93–118. Google Scholar öffnen
  192. Hirschl, Ran, The Judicialization of Politics, in: Goodin, Robert E. (Hrsg.) The Oxford Handbook of Political Science, 2011, online unter: https://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199604456.001.0001/oxfordhb-9780199604456-e-013, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  193. Hirschl, Ran, The Global Expansion of Judicial Power, in: Epstein, Lee, Grendstad, Gunnar, Šadl, Urška, Weinshall, Keren (Hrsg.) Oxford Handbook of Comparative Judicial Behavior, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2023, University of Texas Law, Legal Studies Research Paper, 01.03.2023, online unter https://ssrn.com/abstract=4373693, abgerufen am 28.01.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  194. HM Government, Parliamentary Privilege, S. 48, 2012, online unter: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/79390/consultation.pdf (zuletzt abgerufen 14.08.2024) Google Scholar öffnen
  195. HM Government, Make a claim to an employment tribunal, 2024, online unter: https://www.gov.uk/employment-tribunals/refund-tribunal-fees, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  196. HM Government, Ministry of Justice, Judicial retirement age to rise to 75, 09.03.2021, online unter: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/judicial-retirement-age-to-rise-to-75, abgerufen am 14.08.2024 Google Scholar öffnen
  197. HM Prison Service, Ministry of Justice, Prisons in England and Wales, 01.04.2022, online unter: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/prisons-in-england-and-wales, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  198. Hobson, Clark, Is It Now Institutionally Appropriate for the Courts to Consider Whether the Assisted Dying Ban is Human Rights Compatible? Conway v Secretary of State for Justice, Medical Law Review, Vol. 26, No. 3, 2018, S. 514–530. Google Scholar öffnen
  199. Hogarth, Raphael, A Supreme Court hit parade: the six cases that stole the headlines, Prospect, 24.01.2020, online unter: https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/essays/39770/a-supreme-court-hit-parade-the-six-cases-that-stole-the-headlines, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  200. Holmes, Oliver Wendell Jr., The Path of the Law, Harvard Law Review, Vol. 10, No. 8, S. 457–478, 25.03.1897, online unter: http://moglen.law.columbia.edu/LCS/palaw.pdf, abgerufen am 14.08.2024). Google Scholar öffnen
  201. House of Lords, Assisted Dying Bill [HL], A Bill to enable adults who are terminally ill to be provided at their request with specified assistance to end their own life; and for connected purposes, 28.04.2022, online unter: https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/2875, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  202. Hughes, Kirsty, Judicial Review and Closed Material Procedure in the Supreme Court, The Cambridge Law Journal, Vol. 72, Issue 3, November 2013, S. 491–494. Google Scholar öffnen
  203. Hughes, Kristy, The Limits of Freedom of Information and Human Rights, and the Possibilities of the Common Law, The Cambridge Law Journal, Vol. 73, Issue 3, November 2014, S. 471–474. Google Scholar öffnen
  204. Hunter, Rosemary, Rackley, Erika, Judicial leadership on the UK Supreme Court, Legal Studies, Vol. 38, Issue 2, 2018, S. 191–220. Google Scholar öffnen
  205. Huq, Aziz Z., When Was Judicial Self-Restraint, California Law Review, Vol. 100, 2012, S. 579–605. Google Scholar öffnen
  206. Hysing, Erik, Olsson, Jan, Green Inside Activism for Stustainable Development. Political Agency and Institutional Change, London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2018. Google Scholar öffnen
  207. Irish News, Geraldine Finucane to seek damages from government, 07.01.2020, online unter: https://www.irishnews.com/news/northernirelandnews/2023/01/07/news/geraldine_finucane_to_seek_damages_from_government-2981702/, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  208. Issacharoff, Samuel, What Does the Supreme Court Do?, in: Kaiser, Anna-Bettina, Petersen, Niels, Saurer, Johannes (Hrsg.) The US Supreme Court and Contemporary Constitutional Law: The Obama Era and Its Legacy, Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2018, S. 19–40. Google Scholar öffnen
  209. Jackson, Vicki, Judicial Independence: Structure, Context, Attitude, in: Seibert-Fohr, A. (Hrsg.) Judicial Independence in Transition, Heidelberg [u.a]: Springer, 2012, S. 19–86. Google Scholar öffnen
  210. Jacobsohn, Gary Jeffrey, Roznai, Yaniv, Constitutional Revolution, New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2020. Google Scholar öffnen
  211. JFS School, Admission Policy for 2023/24, 16.11.2021, online unter: https://jfs.brent.sch.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/JFS-Admissions-Policy-2023-24.pdf, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  212. Johnson Restrepo, Daniela, Modern Day Extradition Practice: A Case Analysis of Julian Assange, Notre Dame Journal of International & Comparative Law, Vol. 11, Issue 1, 2021, Article 6, S. 138–157. Google Scholar öffnen
  213. Johnston, Neil, Prisoner’s voting rights. Research Briefing, House of Commons Library, 09.08.2023, online unter: https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-7461/CBP-7461.pdf abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  214. Jones, Brian Christopher, Constitutional Paternalism: The Rise and Problematic Use of Constitutional Guardian Rhetoric, International Law and Politics, Vol. 51, No. 3, 2019, S. 773–806. Google Scholar öffnen
  215. Jones, Imogen, A political judgment? Reconciling hearsay and the right to challenge, The international Journal of Evidence & Proof, Vol. 14, Issue 3, 2010, S.232 – 252. Google Scholar öffnen
  216. Jones, Martin David, Dividing the kingdom: Britain’s game of thrones, Quadrant, Vol. 66, Issue 3, March 2022, S. 14–20. Google Scholar öffnen
  217. Jowell, Jeffrey, The Rule of Law, in: Jowell, Jeffrey, Oliver, Dawn, O’Cinneide, Colm (Hrsg.) The Changing Constitution, 8th Ed., Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015, S. 13–38. Google Scholar öffnen
  218. Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, The jurisdiction of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, 2024, online unter: https://www.jcpc.uk/docs/jurisdiction-of-the-jcpc.pdf, abgerufen am 14.08.2024). Google Scholar öffnen
  219. Judicial Power Project, Graham Gee and Richard Ekins: Debating Judicial Power, 20.10.2015, online unter https://judicialpowerproject.org.uk/debating-judicial-power/, abgerufen am 14.08.2024). Google Scholar öffnen
  220. Judicial Power Project, Judicial Power: 50 problematic cases, 09.05.2016, online unter: http://judicialpowerproject.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/JPP-50-Cases-4.pdf, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  221. Judicial Power Project, About the Judicial Power Project, 2024, online unter: http://judicialpowerproject.org.uk/about/ abgerufen am 14.08.2024 Google Scholar öffnen
  222. Judicial Power Project, 2024, online unter: http://judicialpowerproject.org.uk/, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  223. Judicial Power Project, Publications, 2024, online unter: https://judicialpowerproject.org.uk/publications/, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  224. Kaiser, André, Die politische Theorie des Neo-Institutionalismus: James March und Johan Olsen, in: Brodocz, André, Schaal, Gary S. (Hrsg.) Politische Theorien der Gegenwart II. Eine Einführung, Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien, 2001, S. 254–282. Google Scholar öffnen
  225. Kaiser, Roman, Europarecht, Prärogative und Devolution: Der UK Supreme Court entscheidet über den Brexit, Verfassungsblog, 24.01.2017, https://verfassungsblog.de/europarecht-praerogative-und-devolution-der-uk-supreme-court-entscheidet-ueber-den-brexit/, abgerufen am 14.08.2024 Google Scholar öffnen
  226. Kaiser, Roman, Wolff, Daniel, “Verfassungshütung“ im Commonwealth als Vorbild für den deutschen Verfassungsstaat? Zugleich ein Beitrag zur Legitimation verfassungsrechtlicher Normenkontrolle, Der Staat, Vol. 56, Nr. 1, 2017, S. 39–76. Google Scholar öffnen
  227. Kashima, Tetsuden, Judgment Without Trial. Japanese American Imprisonment During World War II. Seattle, Washington: University of Washington Press, 2011. Google Scholar öffnen
  228. Kautz, Steven, On Liberal Constitutionalism, in: Kautz, Steven, Melzer, Arthur, Weinberger, Jerry, Zinman, M. Richard (Hrsg.) The Supreme Court and the Idea of Constitutionalism, Philadelphia, PE: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2009, S. 30–49. Google Scholar öffnen
  229. Keating, Michael, The UK’s union has been fractured by Brexit, LSE Blog, 23.04.2021, online unter: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2021/04/23/the-uks-union-has-been-fractured-by-brexit/, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  230. Keating, Michael, Will Brexit break up the United Kingdom, The Loop, ECPR’s Political Science Blog, 03.08.2021, online unter: https://theloop.ecpr.eu/will-brexit-break-up-the-united-kingdom/, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  231. Kelemen, R. Daniel, Stone Sweet, Alec, Assessing ʻThe Transformation of Europeʼ: A View from Political Science, in: Miguel Poiares Maduro, Marlene Wind (Hrsg.), The Transformation of Europe: Twenty-Five Years On. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 2017, S. 193–205. Google Scholar öffnen
  232. Kellner, Peter, Brexit and the Gradual Disintegration of the United Kingdom, Strategic Europe, Carnegie, 14.01.2021, online unter: https://carnegieeurope.eu/strategiceurope/83632, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  233. Kenny, Meryl, Gender and Political Recruitment. Theorizing Institutional Change, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2013. Google Scholar öffnen
  234. Kerr, Margo Munro, Justice for Pat Finuncane: the fight continues, The Socialist Lawyer, Issue 87, 01.01.2021, S. 7. Google Scholar öffnen
  235. King, Anthony, Does the United Kingdom Still Have a Constitution?, London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2001 (The Hamlyn Lectures, 52). Google Scholar öffnen
  236. King, Jeff A., Institutional Approaches to Judicial Restraint, Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 28, Issue 3, 2008, S. 409–441. Google Scholar öffnen
  237. Kirkland, Christopher, Deva, Sagar, Weakness not crisis: Brexit and the UK constitution, British Politics, Vol. 18, 2023, S. 603–622, online unter: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41293-022-00213-y, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  238. Kohler-Hausmann, Issa, Malcom Feeley’s Concept of Law, in: Greenspann, Rosann, Aviram, Hadar, Simon, Jonathan (Hrsg.) The Legal Process and the Promise of Justice: Studies Inspired by the Work of Malcolm Feeley, 2019, S. 36–54. Google Scholar öffnen
  239. Korch, Stefan, Obiter Dicta in der höchstrichterlichen Rechtsprechung zum Gesellschaftsrecht, Zeitschrift für Unternehmens- und Gesellschaftsrecht, Band 50, Heft 6, 2021, S. 867–903. Google Scholar öffnen
  240. Kurland, Philip B., The Rise and Fall of the “Doctrine” of Separation of Powers, Michigan Law Review, Vol. 85, No. 3, 1986, S. 592–613. Google Scholar öffnen
  241. Lachmayer, Konrad, Disempowering courts. The interrelationship between courts and politics in contemporary legal orders or the manifold ways of attacking judicial independence, in: Belov, Martin (Hrsg.) Courts, Politics and Constitutional Law. Judicialization of Politics and Politicization of the Judiciary, London/New York: Routledge, 2020. Google Scholar öffnen
  242. Lady Hale, Law Maker or Law Reformer: What is a Law Lady for?, Irish Jurist, Vol. 40, 2005, S. 1–16. Google Scholar öffnen
  243. Lady Hale, Press Summary, R (on the application of Miller) (Appellant) v The Prime Minister (Respondent) Cherry and others (Respondents) v Advocate General for Scotland (Appellant) (Scotland), online unter: https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2019-0192-summary.pdf, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  244. Lady Hale, Spider Woman. A Life, Dublin: Vintage, 2021. Google Scholar öffnen
  245. Lakin, Stuart, Debunking the Idea of Parliamentary Sovereignty: The Controlling Factor of Legality in the British Constitution, Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, Winter, Vol. 28, No. 4, 2008, S. 709–734. Google Scholar öffnen
  246. Lakin, Stuart, Parliamentary privilege, Parliamentary sovereignty, and Constitutional Principle, UK Const. L. Blog, 11.02.2013, online unter: http://ukconstitutionallaw.org, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  247. Lansbergen, Anja, Prisoner Disenfranchisement in the United Kingdom and the Scope of EU Law, European Constitutional Law Review, Vol. 10, Issue 1, 2014, S. 126–142. Google Scholar öffnen
  248. Laws, Stephen, Second-Guessing Policy Choices. The rule of law after the Supreme Court’s UNISON judgment, Policy Exchange, 14.03.2018, online unter: https://policyexchange.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Second-guessing-policy-choices-2.pdf, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  249. Laws, Stephen, How to Address the Breakdown of Trust Between Government and Courts, Policy Exchange, 12.03.2021, online unter: https://policyexchange.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/How-to-Address-the-Breakdown-of-Trust-Between-Government-and-Courts.pdf, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  250. Lax, Jeffrey R., The New Judicial Politics of Legal Doctrine, Annual Review of Political Science, 2011, Vol. 14, S. 131–157. Google Scholar öffnen
  251. Le Sueur, Andrew, The Conception of the UK’s New Supreme Court, in: ders. (Hrsg.) Building the UK’s New Supreme Court. National and Comparative Perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004, S. 3–20. Google Scholar öffnen
  252. Lee, James, Against All Odds: Numbers Sitting in the UK Supreme Court and Really, Really Important Cases, in: Daly, Paul (Hrsg.) Apex Courts and the Common Law, Toronto: Toronto University Press, 2019, S. 94–139. Google Scholar öffnen
  253. Lepsius, Oliver, Souveränität und Identität als Frage des Institutionen-Settings, in: Jahrbuch des öffentlichen Rechts, Vol. 63, 2015, S. 63–90. Google Scholar öffnen
  254. Leslie, Justin, Vindicating common law constitutionalism, Legal Studies, Vol. 30, No. 2, 2010, S. 301–323. Google Scholar öffnen
  255. Leverick, Fiona, The Supreme Court strikes back, Edinburgh Law Review, Vol. 15, No. 2, 2011, S. 287–292. Google Scholar öffnen
  256. Leyland, Peter, The Constitution of the United Kingdom. A Contextual Analysis, 4th Ed., Oxford [u.a.]: Hart Publishing, 2021. Google Scholar öffnen
  257. Lhotta, Roland, „Picking up the slack“: Bundesstaatsreform durch judizielle Modifikation von Leitideen?, in: von Blumenthal, J., Bröchler, S. (Hrsg.) Föderalismusreform in Deutschland. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, 2010, S. 59–94. Google Scholar öffnen
  258. Lhotta, Roland, Die konstitutive Wirkung des Rechts und seiner Sprache: Judizielle Governance als diskursiver Wettbewerb um Deutungshoheit, in: Bäcker, Carsten, Klatt, Matthias, Zucca-Soest, Sabrina (Hrsg.), Sprache – Recht – Gesellschaft, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2012. Google Scholar öffnen
  259. Lhotta, Roland, Recht und Politik, in: Nohlen, Dieter, Grotz, Florian (Hrsg.) Kleines Lexikon der Politik, 6. überarb. und erw. Aufl., Bonn: C.H. Beck, 2015, S. 531–535. Google Scholar öffnen
  260. Lhotta, Roland, Parlamentssouveränität und Verfassungswandel im Vereinigten Königreich: Von Zombies, Richtern und konstitutionellen Leitideen, Zeitschrift für Parlamentsfragen ZParl, Jg. 49, No. 4, 2018, S. 814–826. Google Scholar öffnen
  261. Lhotta, Roland, Pandemischer Konstitutionalismus. Aporien von Freiheit, Solidarität und Schutz des Lebens, INDES. Zeitschrift für Politik und Gesellschaft, H. 3–4/2022, S. 30–37. Google Scholar öffnen
  262. Lilian Goldman Law Library, The Federalist Papers: No. 49, The Avalon Project. Documents in Law, History and Diplomacy, 2008, online unter: https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed49.asp, abgerufen am 24.01.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  263. Lim, Ernest, Ex Turpi Causa: Reformation not Revolution, The Modern Law Review, Vol. 80, Issue 5, 2017, S. 927–954. Google Scholar öffnen
  264. Lindrea, Victoria, Julian Assange denied permission to appeal against extradition, BBC, 14.03.2022, online unter: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-60743322, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  265. Lippincott, C., Marks, B. (Produktion), Cannon, D. (Regisseur), 1995, Judge Dredd [Film], USA: Hollywood Pictures, Cinergi Pictures, Edward R. Pressman Film Coporation. Google Scholar öffnen
  266. Lord Bingham, The Rule of Law, London: Penguin Books, 2010. Google Scholar öffnen
  267. Lord Kerr, The Conversation between Strasbourg and national courts – Dialogue or Dictation?, Irish Jurist, New Series, Vol. 44, 2009, S. 1–12. Google Scholar öffnen
  268. Lord Laws, The Common Law Constitution, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014. Google Scholar öffnen
  269. Loughlin, Martin, What is Constitutionalism?, in: Dobner, Petra, Loughlin, Martin (Hrsg.) The Twilight of Constitutionalism?, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010, S. 47–69. Google Scholar öffnen
  270. Loughlin, Martin, The British Constitution. A Very Short Introduction, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013. Google Scholar öffnen
  271. Loughlin, Martin, The Case of Prorogation. The UK Constitutional Council’s ruling on appeal from the judgment of the Supreme Court, Policy Exchange, 15.10.2019, online unter: https://policyexchange.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/The-Case-of-Prorogation.pdf, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  272. Loughlin, Martin, A Note on Craig on Miller/Cherry, Public Law, April 2020, S. 278–281. Google Scholar öffnen
  273. Loughlin, Martin, Against Constitutionalism, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2022. Google Scholar öffnen
  274. Loughlin, Martin, Tierney, Stephen, The Shibboleth of Sovereignty, The Modern Law Review, Vol. 81, Issue 6, 2018, S. 989–1016. Google Scholar öffnen
  275. Loveland, Ian, Constitutional Law, Administrative Law, and Human Rights. A Critical Introduction, 9. Auflg., Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2021. Google Scholar öffnen
  276. Lowndes, Vivien, Roberts, Mark, Why Institutions Matter. The New Institutionalism in Political Science, Basingstoke [u.a.]: Palgrave Macmillan, 2013. Google Scholar öffnen
  277. MacCormack, Neil, Questioning Sovereignty: Law, State, and Nation in the European Commonwealth, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999. Google Scholar öffnen
  278. MacDonnell, Vanessa, A Theory of Quasi-Constitutional Legislation, Osgoode Hall Law Journal, Vol. 53, Issue 2, 2016, S. 508–539. Google Scholar öffnen
  279. Mahoney, James, Path Dependence in Historical Sociology, Theory and Society, Vol. 29, No. 4, Aug. 2000, S. 507–548. Google Scholar öffnen
  280. Mahoney, James, Thelen, Kathleen, A Theory of Gradual Institutional Change, in: Mahoney, James, Thelen, Kathleen (Hrsg.) Explaining Institutional Change: Ambiguity, Agency, and Power, London: Cambridge University Press, 2009, S. 1–37. Google Scholar öffnen
  281. Maile, Chris, Diversity, Inclusion and Belonging Strategy & Action Plan 2021–2025, Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, 15.03.2021, online unter: https://www.supremecourt.uk/docs/uksc-diversity-inclusion-and-belonging-strategy-2021.pdf, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  282. Maiman, Richard J., The ʻWar on Terrorʼ in Court: A Comparative Analysis of Judicial Empowerment, in: Casye, T. (Hrsg.) The Legacy of the Crash, London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011, S. 242–261. Google Scholar öffnen
  283. Malleson, Kate, Diversity in the Judiciary: The Case For Positive Action, Journal of Law and Society, Vol. 36, No. 3, September 2009, S. 376–402. Google Scholar öffnen
  284. Malleson, Kate, Values diversity in the United Kingdom Supreme Court: abandoning the ‘don’t-ask-don’t-tell’ policy, Journal of Law and Society, Vol. 49, No. 1, 2022, S. 3–22. Google Scholar öffnen
  285. Mallory, Conall, Human Rights Imperialists. The Extraterritorial Application of the European Convention on Human Rights, Oxford [u.a.]: Hart Publishing, 2020. Google Scholar öffnen
  286. Mancini, Susanna, To Be or Not to Be Jewish: The UK Supreme Court Answers the Question; Judgment of 16 December 2009, R v The Governing Body of JFS, 2009 UKSC 15, European Constitutional Law Review, Vol. 6, Issue 3, 2010, S. 481–502. Google Scholar öffnen
  287. March, James G., Olsen, Johan P., The New Institutionalism: Organizational Factors in Political Life, The American Political Science Review, Vol. 78, No. 3, Sep 1984, S. 737–749. Google Scholar öffnen
  288. March, James G., Olsen, Johan P., 1986, Garbage can models of decision making in organizations, in: Ambiguity and command. Organizational perspectives on military decision making, March, James G., Weissinger-Baylon, Roger (Hrsg.), Marshfield: Pitman Publishing, 1986, S. 11–35. Google Scholar öffnen
  289. March, James G., Olsen, Johan P., The Logic of Appropriateness, in: Moran, Michael, Rein, Martin, Goodin, Robert E. (Hrsg.) The Oxford Handbook of Political Science, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006, S. 689–708. Google Scholar öffnen
  290. March, James G., Olsen, Johan P., Elaborating the „New Institutionalism“, in: Goodin, Robert E. (Hrsg.) The Oxford Handbook of Political Science, Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press, 2011, S. 159–175. Google Scholar öffnen
  291. March, James G., Olsen, Johan P., The Logic of Appropriateness, in: Goodin, Robert E. (Hrsg.) The Oxford Handbook of Political Science, Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press, 2011, 478–497. Google Scholar öffnen
  292. Matthews, Felicity, Whose Mandate is it Anyway? Brexit, the Constitution and the Contestation of Authority, The Political Quarterly, Vol. 88, No. 4, October-December 2017, S. 603–611. Google Scholar öffnen
  293. May, Erskine, McKay, William (Hrsg.) Treatise on The Law, Privileges, Proceedings and Usage of Parliament, 23rd Ed., London: LexisNexis Butterworths, 2004. Google Scholar öffnen
  294. McCluskey, John, 2011, Supreme Error, Edinburgh Law Review, Vol. 15, No. 2, 2011, S. 276–287. Google Scholar öffnen
  295. McConalogue, Jim, The British Constitution Resettled. Parliamentary Sovereignty Before and After Brexit, Cham, Schweiz: Palgrave Macmillan, 2020. Google Scholar öffnen
  296. McDonald, Henry, Graham-Harrison, Emma, Baker, Sinead, Ireland votes by landslide to legalise abortion, The Guardian, 26.05.2018, online unter: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/may/26/ireland-votes-by-landslide-to-legalise-abortion, abgerufen am 05.02.2024 Google Scholar öffnen
  297. McHarg, Aileen, Analysis. Axa General Insurances Ltd. V Lord Advocate, The Edinburgh Law Review, Vol. 16, No. 2, 2012, 224–229. Google Scholar öffnen
  298. McLachlan, Campbell, The Foreign Relations Power in the Supreme Court, Law Quarterly Review, Vol. 134, July 2018, S. 380–406. Google Scholar öffnen
  299. McLean, Janet, 2016, The unwritten political constitution and its enemies, International Journal of Constitutional Law, Vol. 14, No. 1, 2016, 119–136. Google Scholar öffnen
  300. Meagher, Dan, The Common Law Principle of Legality in the Age of Rights, Melbourne University Law Review, Vol. 35, 2011, S. 449–478. Google Scholar öffnen
  301. Menzel, Jörg, Supreme Court (Kanada) v. 20.08.1998 – Reference re Secession of Quebec, in: ders. et al. (Hrsg.) Völkerrechtsprechung. Ausgewählte Entscheidungen zum Völkerrecht in Retrospektive, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2005, S. 278–283. Google Scholar öffnen
  302. Miele, Chris (Hrsg.) The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom: history, art, architecture, London: Merrell Publisher, 2010. Google Scholar öffnen
  303. Milford, Julian, High Speed Trains and Black Spider Letters: Freedom of Information and the Ministerial Veto, Judicial Review, Vol. 20, Issue 4, 2015, S. 206–215. Google Scholar öffnen
  304. Ministry of Justice, Responding to human rights judgments. Report to the Joint Committee on Human Rights on the Government response to human rights judgments 2011–12, Dezember 2022, online unter: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6389d053d3bf7f328365e9f8/responding-human-rights-judgments-2022-print.pdf, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  305. Monaghan, Karon, Case Comment: R (E) v Governing Body of JFS & Ors [2009] UKSC 15, UKSCblog, 21.12.2009, online unter: http://ukscblog.com/case-comment-r-e-v-governing-body-of-jfs-ors-2009-uksc-15/ abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  306. Montesquieu, Charles Louis and Heydte, Friedrich August (Hrsg.), Vom Geist der Gesetze: Eine Auswahl, Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter, 1950, online unter https://doi.org/10.1515/9783111536903, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  307. Moran, Lee, Britain’s highest female judge blasts secretive men-only Garrick Club for „holding women back“, Dailymail, 15.10.2011, online unter: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2049514/UKs-highest-female-judge-blasts-Garrick-Club-holding-women-back.html, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  308. Morgan, Polly, The public tragedy of the Owens’ divorce, Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, Vol. 41, No. 1, 2019, S. 100–102. Google Scholar öffnen
  309. Murkens, Jo Eric Khushal, The Quest for Constitutionalism in UK Public Law Discourse, Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 29, Issue 3, 2009, S. 427–455. Google Scholar öffnen
  310. Murkens, Jo Eric Khushal, Mixed Messages in Bottles: the European Union, Devolution, and the Future of the Constitution, The Modern Law Review, Vol. 80, No. 4, 2017, S. 685–696. Google Scholar öffnen
  311. Myers, Jackson A., Transatlantic Perspectives on the Political Question Doctrine, Virginia Law Review, Vol. 106, No. 4, June 2020, S. 1007–1030. Google Scholar öffnen
  312. Nader, Laura, Law in culture and society, 1. Paperback print, Berkley, California [u.a.]: University of California Press, 1997. Google Scholar öffnen
  313. Nancy Maveety (Hrsg.) The Pioneers of Judicial Behavior, Ann Arbor, Michigan: Michigan University Press, 2003. Google Scholar öffnen
  314. Nicol, Danny, Supreme Court Against the People, U.K. Const. L. Blog, 25.09.2019, online unter: https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  315. Norton, Philip, Governing Britain. Parliament, ministers and our ambiguous constitution, Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2020. Google Scholar öffnen
  316. Nugraha, Ignatius Jordan, Protection of Constitutional Identity as a Legitimate Aim for Differential Treatment. ECtHR 9 June 2022, No. 49270/11, Savickis and Others v Latvia, European Constitutional Law Review, 2023, No. 19, Issue 1, S. 141–162. Google Scholar öffnen
  317. O’Brien, William, The Home Rule and How it Came About, London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd, 1923. Google Scholar öffnen
  318. O’Keefe, Cullen, Stabilizing the US Judiciary by Threatening to Pack It, Verfassungsblog, 03.11.2020, online unter: https://verfassungsblog.de/stabilizing-the-us-judiciary-by-threatening-to-pack-it/, zuletzt abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  319. O’Sullivan, Catherine, Mens rea, motive and assisted suicide: does the DPP’s Policy go too far?, Legal Studies, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2015, S. 96–113. Google Scholar öffnen
  320. O’Toole, Fintan, Disunited Kingdom, Foreign Affairs, March/April 2023, Vol. 102, Issue 2, S. 106–118. Google Scholar öffnen
  321. Oldenbourg, Andreas, Wer ist das Volk? Eine republikanische Theorie der Sezession, Frankfurt am Main: Campus, 2018. Google Scholar öffnen
  322. Oliver, Dawn, The United Kingdom, in: Oliver, Dawn, Fusaro, Carlo (Hrsg.) How Constitutions Change. A Comparative Study, Oxford and Portland, Oregon: Hart Publishing, 2011, S. 329–355. Google Scholar öffnen
  323. Oliver, Lisi, The Beginning of English Law, Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2002. Google Scholar öffnen
  324. Olsen, Johan P., Change and continuity: an institutional approach to institutions of democratic government, European Political Science Review, Vol. 1, Issue 1, March 2009, S. 3–32. Google Scholar öffnen
  325. Olsson, Jan, Subversion in Institutional Change and Stability. A Neglected Mechanism, London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2016. Google Scholar öffnen
  326. Pangalangam, Paul C., “Government by judiciary” in the Philippines, in: Ginsburg, Tom, Chen, Albert H.Y. (Hrsg.) Administrative Law in Asia. Comparative Perspectives. Oxford: Routledge, 2009, S. 313–328. Google Scholar öffnen
  327. Parker, Kunal M., The Transformation of the Common Law: Modernism, History, and The Turn To Process, in: Dubber, Markus D., Tomlins, Christopher (Hrsg.) The Oxford Handbook of Legal History, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018, S. 695–716. Google Scholar öffnen
  328. Paterson, Alan, The Law Lords. How Britain’s Top Judges See Their Role. London, Baskingstoke: The Macmillan Press, 1982. Google Scholar öffnen
  329. Paterson, Alan, Final Judgment. The Last Law Lords and the Supreme Court, Oxford and Portland Oregon: Hart Publishing, 2013. Google Scholar öffnen
  330. Paterson, Alan, Creating a group oriented Supreme Court – Lord Neuberger’s legacy, International Journal of legal Profession, Vol. 28, Issue 1, 2021, S. 107–126. Google Scholar öffnen
  331. Paterson, Alan, Presidency and the UK Supreme Court: Lord Neuberger’s Legacy, in: Clarry, Daniel (Hrsg.) The UK Supreme Court Yearbook, Vol. 10: Legal Year 2018–2019, London: Appellate Press, 2021, S. 244–288. Google Scholar öffnen
  332. Paterson, Alan, Assessing Lady Hale’s Impact on the UK’s Final Appeal Courts, in: Hunter, Rosemary, Rackley, Erika (Hrsg.) Justice for Everyone. The Jurisprudence and Legal Lives of Brenda Hale, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2022, S. 117–133. Google Scholar öffnen
  333. Peek, Lori, Behind the Backlash. Muslim Americans after 9/11. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2011. Google Scholar öffnen
  334. Peters Guy, The Politics of Path Dependency: Political Conflict in Historical Institutionalism, The Journal of Politics, Vol. 67, No. 4, 2005, 1275–1300. Google Scholar öffnen
  335. Peters, B. Guy, Institutional theory in political science. The “new institutionalism”, London and New York: Pinter, 1999. Google Scholar öffnen
  336. Peters, B. Guy, Institutionalism and Public Policy, in: Zittoun, P., Peters, B. G. (Hrsg.) Contemporary Approaches to Public Policy, London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2016, S. 57–72. Google Scholar öffnen
  337. Peters, B. Guy, Pierre, Jon, King, Desmond S., The Politics of Path Dependency: Political Conflict in Historical Institutionalism, Journal of Politics, Vol. 67, Issue 4, Nov 2005, S. 1275–1300. Google Scholar öffnen
  338. Petley, Julian, We are still perilously close to Hailsham’s “elective dictatorship”, LSE Brexit Blog, 30.09.2019, online unter: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2019/09/30/we-are-closer-than-ever-to-hailshams-elective-dictatorship/, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  339. Phillipson, Gavin, EU Law as an Agent of National Constitutional Change: Miller v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, Yearbook of European Law, Vol. 36, No. 1, 2017, S. 46–93. Google Scholar öffnen
  340. Phillipson, Gavin, Brexit, Prerogative and the Courts: Why did Political Constitutionalism support the Government Side in Miller?, Queensland Law Journal, Vol. 36, Issue 2, 2017, S. 311–331. Google Scholar öffnen
  341. Policy Exchange, 2024, online unter: https://policyexchange.org.uk/, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  342. Poole, Thomas, Back to the Future? Unearthing the Theory of Common Law Constitutionalism, Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 23, No. 3, 2003, S. 435–454. Google Scholar öffnen
  343. Poole, Thomas, Devotion to Legalism: On the Brexit Case, The Modern Law Review, Vol. 80, Issue 4, 2017, S. 696–710. Google Scholar öffnen
  344. Poole, Thomas, The Strange Death of Prerogative in England, University of Western Australia Law Review, Vol. 43, Issue 2, 2018, S. 42–66. Google Scholar öffnen
  345. Porto, Brian L., May It Please the Court: Judicial Processes and Politics in America, 3rd Edition, Boca Raton, London, New York: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group. 2017. Google Scholar öffnen
  346. Posner, Richard A., The Meaning of Judicial Self-Restraint, Indiana Law Journal, Vol. 59, Issue 1, 1983, S. 1–24. Google Scholar öffnen
  347. Posner, Richard A., The Rise and Fall of Judicial Self-Restraint, California Law Review, Vol. 100, Issue 3, 2012, S. 519–556. Google Scholar öffnen
  348. Postema, Gerald J., Philosophy of the Common Law, in: Coleman, Jules, Shapiro, Scott (Hrsg.) The Oxford Handbook of Jurisprudence and Philosophy of Law, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004, S. 588–622. Google Scholar öffnen
  349. Potter, Harry, Law, Liberty and the Constitution. A Brief History of the Common Law, Woodbridge: The Boydell Press, 2015. Google Scholar öffnen
  350. Prantl, Heribert, Aufstand der Aufgeregten, Süddeutsche Zeitung, 19.08.2015, online unter: https://www.sueddeutsche.de/politik/20-jahre-kruzifix-urteil-aufstand-der-aufgeregten-1.2613635, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  351. Prodromou, Zena, Wilson, Shona, Criminal Law, Evidence and Procedure, in: Clarry, Daniel (Hrsg.) The UK Supreme Court Yearbook, Vol. 2: Legal Year 2010–2011, London: Appellate Press, 2018, S. 63–70. Google Scholar öffnen
  352. Proverbia Iuris, Ex turpi causa non oritur action, 2024, online unter: https://www.proverbia-iuris.de/ex-turpi-causa-non-oritur-actio/, abgerufen am 14.08.2024). Google Scholar öffnen
  353. Public Law for Everyone, 2024, online unter: https://publiclawforeveryone.com/, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  354. Pyper, Doug, McGuiness, Feargul, Employment tribunals after R(Unison) v Lord Chancellor. House of the Commons Library. Briefing Paper Number CBP 8296, 05.11.2018, online unter: https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-8296/CBP-8296.pdf, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  355. Quinn, Ben, Sweden drops Julian Assange rape investigation, The Guardian, 19.11.2019, online unter: https://www.theguardian.com/media/2019/nov/19/sweden-drops-julian-assange-investigation, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  356. Reed Langen, Nicholas, Reforming the Supreme Court, U.K. Const. L. Blog, 1.12.2020, online unter: https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  357. Reisinger, Will, Dougherty, Trent A., Moser, Noland, Environmental Enforcement and the Limits of Cooperative Federalism: Will Courts Allow Citizens Suits to Pick Up the Slack?, Duke Environmental Law & Policy Forum, Vol. 20, Issue 1, 2010, S. 1–61. Google Scholar öffnen
  358. Reyes, René, Constitutional Crisis Compared: Impeachment, Brexit, and Executive Accountability, Emory International Law, Vol. 35, Issue 3, 2021, S. 441–483. Google Scholar öffnen
  359. Roddenbery, G. (Executive Producer/Creator) Star Trek: The Original Series [Serie], USA: Desilu Production, Paramount Production, Norway Corporation, 1966–1969. Google Scholar öffnen
  360. Ronchi, Paolo, Axa v. Lord Advocate: Putting the Axa to Parliamentary Sovereignty, European Public Law, Vol. 19, No. 1, 2013, S. 61–72. Google Scholar öffnen
  361. Rose, Emily, R (on the application of UNISON) v Lord Chancellor: A masterclass in the constitutional right of access to the courts, Judicial Review: The Law Journal of the Scottish Universities, Vol. 2017, Issue 4, S. 261–267. Google Scholar öffnen
  362. Rosenfeld, Michel, Sajó, András (Hrsg.) Oxford Handbook of Comparative Constitutional Law, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012. Google Scholar öffnen
  363. Roux, Theunis, The Politico-Legal Dynamics of Judicial Review. A Comparative Analysis, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018. Google Scholar öffnen
  364. Rozenberg, Joshua, The Media and The UK Supreme Court, in: Clarry, Daniel (Hrsg.) The UK Supreme Court Yearbook, Vol. 2: Legal Year 2010–2011, London: Appellate Press, 2018, S. 43–45. Google Scholar öffnen
  365. Rozenberg, Joshua, Enemies of the People? How Judges shape Society, Bristol: Bristol University Press, 2020. Google Scholar öffnen
  366. Rubin, Edward L., The Varieties of Judicial Independence and the Judiciary’s Role in Political Reform, in: Greenspann, Rosann, Aviram, Hadar, Simon, Jonathan (Hrsg.) The Legal Process and the Promise of Justice: Studies Inspired by the Workt of Malcolm Feeley, Cambridge [u.a]: Cambridge University Press, 2019, S. 335–360. Google Scholar öffnen
  367. Rubin, Edward, Feeley, Malcolm, Creating Legal Doctrine, Southern California Law Review, Vol. 69, No. 6, 1996, S. 1989–2037. Google Scholar öffnen
  368. Ryan, Mark, The Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010: The Evolution and Development of a Constitutional Act, Liverpool Law Review, Vol. 35, Issue 3, 2014, S. 233–254. Google Scholar öffnen
  369. Sadurski, Wojciech, Juridical Coups d´état – all over the place. Comment in „The Juridical Coup d´état and the Problem of Authority” by Alec Stone Sweet, German Law Journal, Vol. 8, No. 10, 2007, S. 935–940. Google Scholar öffnen
  370. Sanger, Andrew, Decisions of British Courts during 2017 Involving Questions of Public or Private International Law: A. Public International Law, British Yearbook of International Law, 19.06.2019, online unter https://doi.org/10.1093/bybil/brz005, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  371. Sankey, Isabella, Liberty’s written evidence to the Select Committee on Extradition Law, Liberty, Sept 2014, online unter: https://www.libertyhumanrights.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Libertys-written-evidence-to-the-House-of-Lords-Select-Committee-on-Extradition-Sept-2014.pdf (zuletzt abgerufen 14.08.2024) Google Scholar öffnen
  372. Sargeant, Christopher, Two Steps Backward, One Step Forward – The Cautionary Tale of Bank Mellat (No 1), Cambridge Journal of International and Comparative Law, Vol. 3, Issue 1, S. 111–123. Google Scholar öffnen
  373. Sartori, Giovanni, Constitutionalism: A Preliminary Discussion, The American Political Science Review, Vol. 56, No. 4, 1962, S. 853–864. Google Scholar öffnen
  374. Scheppele, Kim Lane, Constitutional Ethnography: An Introduction, Law & Society Review, Vol. 38, No. 3, Sep. 2004, S. 389–406. Google Scholar öffnen
  375. Schlag, Pierre, Griffin, Amy J., How to Do Things with Legal Doctrine, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2020. Google Scholar öffnen
  376. Schmidt, Vivienne, Institutionalism, in: Hay, Colin, Lister, Michael, Marsh, David (Hrsg.) The State. Theories and Issues, London: Red Globe Press, 2002, S. 98–117. Google Scholar öffnen
  377. Schmidt, Vivienne, Theorizing Ideas and Discourse in Political Science: Intersubjectivity, Neo-Institutionalisms, and the Power of Ideas, Critical Review, Vol. 29, Issue 2, 2017, S. 248–263. Google Scholar öffnen
  378. Schönberger, Christoph, Identitäterä. Verfassungsidentität zwischen Widerstandsformel und Musealisierung des Grundgesetzes, in: Jahrbuch des öffentlichen Rechts, Vol. 63, 2015, S. 41–62. Google Scholar öffnen
  379. Schulz, Lorenz, Funktionen des obiter dictum, Zeitschrift für Internationale Strafechtsdogmatik, 10/2018, S. 403–407. Google Scholar öffnen
  380. Schütze, Robert, Tierney, Stephen (Hrsg.) The United Kingdom and the Federal Idea, Oxford [u.a.]: Hart Publishing, 2018. Google Scholar öffnen
  381. Scolnicov, Anat, A Question of Faith, The Cambridge Law Journal, Vol. 69, Issue 2, July 2010, S. 220–223. Google Scholar öffnen
  382. Scott, P., Crossing the Rubicon: closed hearings in the Supreme Court, Edinburgh Law Review, Vol. 18, Issue 1, S. 88–93. Google Scholar öffnen
  383. Scottish Parliament, Proposed Assisted Dying for Terminally Ill Adults (Scotland) Bill, 2024, online unter: https://www.parliament.scot/bills-and-laws/proposals-for-bills/proposed-assisted-dying-for-terminally-ill-adults-scotland-bill, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  384. Sedley, Stephen, The Common Law and the Constitution, in: Nolan, Michael Patrick, Sedley, Stephen (Hrsg.) The Making and Remaking of the British Constitution, London: Blackstone Press, 1997, S. 15–31. Google Scholar öffnen
  385. Sedley, Stephen, Ashes and Sparks. Essays on Law and Justice, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011. Google Scholar öffnen
  386. Sedley, Stephen, Lions Under The Throne. Essays on the History of English Public Law, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015. Google Scholar öffnen
  387. Sedley, Stephen, Law and the Whirligig of Time, Oxford [u.a.]: Hart Publishing, 2018. Google Scholar öffnen
  388. Segal, Jeffrey A., Separation-of-Powers Games in the Positive Theory of Congress and Court, American Political Science Review, Vol. 91, No. 1, March 1997, S. 28–44. Google Scholar öffnen
  389. Segal, Jeffrey, Correction to “Separation-of-Powers Games in the Positive Theory of Congress and Courts”, American Political Science Review, Vol. 92, No. 4, 1998, S. 923–926. Google Scholar öffnen
  390. Segal, Jeffrey, A., Spaeth, Harold J., The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model Revisited, Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press, 2002. Google Scholar öffnen
  391. Selous, Andrew, Smoking in Prisons, Letter from Prisons Minister Andrew Selous to Robert Neill MP, Chairman of the Justice Select Committee regarding smoking in prisons, 29.09.2015, online unter: https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/smoking-in-prisons abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  392. Shakespeare, William, Henry V, Act III, Scene I, Academy of American Poets, 2024, online unter: https://poets.org/poem/henry-v-act-iii-scene-i-once-more-unto-breach-dear-friends, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  393. Shatter, Alan, Undermining the Credibility of Israel’s Legal System is No Way to Celebrate Israel’s Seventy-Fifth Anniversary, Israel Journal of Foreign Affairs, Vol. 17, Issue 1, 2023, S. 12–16. Google Scholar öffnen
  394. Sheehan, Colleen A., James Madison and the Spirit of Republican Self-Government. Cambridge [u.a.]: Cambridge University Press, 2009. Google Scholar öffnen
  395. Shirazi, Sam, The U.K.’s Marbury v. Madison: The Prorogation Case and How Courts Can Protect Democracy, University of Illinois Law Review Online, Vol. 2019 Fall, S. 108–121. Google Scholar öffnen
  396. Sikkink, Kathryn, Ideas and Institutions. Developmentalism in Brasil and Argentina. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1991. Google Scholar öffnen
  397. Smets, Michael, Aristidou, Angela, Whittington, Richard, Towards a Practice-Driven Institutionalism, in: R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, T. B. Lawrence & R. Meyers (Hrsg.) The Sage Handbook of organizational institutionalism, 2. Aufl., London: Sage, 2017, S. 384–411. Google Scholar öffnen
  398. Smith, Loren A., Judicialization: The Twilight of Administrative Law, Duke Law Journal, Vol. 1985, No. 2, 1985, S. 427- 466. Google Scholar öffnen
  399. Smith, Paul, Bagehot, Walter (Hrsg.) The English Constitution. 1. Publ, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (Cambridge texts in the history of political thought), 2001. Google Scholar öffnen
  400. Smith, Rogers M., Political Jurisprudence, The “New Institutionalism” and the Future of Public Law, The American Political Science Review, Vol. 82, No. 1, 1988, S. 89–108. Google Scholar öffnen
  401. Smith, Rogers M., If Politics Matters: Implications for a “New Institutionalism”, Studies in American Political Development, Vol. 6, Issue 1, Spring 1992, S. 1–36. Google Scholar öffnen
  402. Smith, Rogers M., Historical Institutionalism and the Study of Law, in: Caldeira, Gregory A., Kelemen, R. Daniel, Whittington, Keith E. (Hrsg.) Oxford Handbook of Law and Politics, New York: Oxford University Press, 2008, S. 46–59 Google Scholar öffnen
  403. Smith, Sarah, Power and authority, The Journal of the Law Society of Scotland, Vol. 56, Issue 11, 2011, online unter: https://www.lawscot.org.uk/members/journal/issues/vol-56-issue-11/power-and-authority/, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  404. Speiring, M., The Imperial System of Weights and Measures: Traditional, Superior and Banned by Europe?, Contemporary British History, Vol. 15, Issue 4, 2001, S. 111–128. Google Scholar öffnen
  405. Stack, James, Enemies of the People, Daily Mail, 04.11.2016. Google Scholar öffnen
  406. Steinbeis, Maximilian, UK Supreme Court: Kein Recht auf Diskriminierung aus Glaubensgründen, Verfassungsblog, 27.11.2013, https://verfassungsblog.de/uk-supreme-court-keine-schwulendiskriminierung-aus-glaubensgruenden/, abgerufen am 14.08.2024 Google Scholar öffnen
  407. Stephenson, Scott, The Supreme Court’s renewed interest in autochthonous constitutionalism. [2015] Public Law 394, 18.08.2014, online unter SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2482511, Google Scholar öffnen
  408. Stone Sweet, Judicialization and the Construction of Governance, in: Shapiro, Martin, Stone Sweet, Alec (Hrsg.) On Law, Politics & Judicialization, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002. Google Scholar öffnen
  409. Stone Sweet, Alec, Governing with Judges: Constitutional Politics in Europe, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000. Google Scholar öffnen
  410. Stone Sweet, Alec, The judicial construction of Europe, Oxford [u.a.]: Oxford University Press, 2004. Google Scholar öffnen
  411. Stone Sweet, Alec, The Juridical Coup d´État and the Problem of Authority, German Law Journal, Vol. 8, No. 10, 2007, S. 915–927. Google Scholar öffnen
  412. Strauss, Peter L., Separation of Powers in Comparative Perspective, in: Cane, Peter, Hofmann, Herwig Ch., Lindseth, Peter (Hrsg.) The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Administrative Law, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2021, S. 397–420. Google Scholar öffnen
  413. Sumption, Jonathan, Trials of the State. Law and the Decline of Politics. London: Profile Books, 2019. Google Scholar öffnen
  414. Sydow, Gernot, Auf der Suche nach dem pouvoir constituant. Perspektiven der britischen Verfassungsentwicklung. In: Baer, Susanne, Lepsius, Oliver, Schönberger Christoph, Waldhoff, Christian, Walter, Christian (Hrsg.) Jahrbuch des Öffentlichen Rechts, 65, 2017, S. 617–646. Google Scholar öffnen
  415. Szawarski, Piotr, Classic cases revisited – Tony Nicklinson and the question of dignity, Journal of Intensive Care Society, Vol. 21, Issue 2, 2020, S.174 – 178. Google Scholar öffnen
  416. Tate, Neal C., Vallinder Torbjörn (Hrsg.) The Global Expansion of Judicial Power, New York: New York University Press, 1997. Google Scholar öffnen
  417. Taylor, Robert Brett, The Contested Constitution: An Analysis of the Competing Models of British Constitutionalism, Public Law, No. 2018, S. 500–522. Google Scholar öffnen
  418. The Cambridge Law Journal, 2024, online unter: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/cambridge-law-journal, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  419. The Economist, Britain’s Supreme Court takes a conservative turn, 02.06.2022, online unter: https://www.economist.com/britain/2022/06/02/britains-supreme-court-takes-a-conservative-turn, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  420. The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, The Judicial Committee, 2024, online unter: https://www.jcpc.uk/about/judicial-committe.html, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  421. The Library of Congress, Federalist No. 49, The Federalist Papers, 2024, online unter: https://web.archive.org/web/20090507182906/http://thomas.loc.gov/home/histdox/fed_49.html, abgerufen am 24.01.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  422. The Newsroom, Pat Finucane: Widow of murdered solicitor to receive £5,000 in additional damages from Secretary of State, 30.03.2023, online unter: https://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/crime/pat-finucane-widow-of-murdered-solicitor-to-receive-ps5000-in-additional-damages-from-secretary-of-state-4085635, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  423. The Royal Household, Crown Dependencies, 2024, online unter: https://www.royal.uk/crown-dependencies, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  424. Thelen K., Steinmo, S., Historical Institutionalism in Comparative Perspective, in: S. Steinmo, K. Thelen und F. Longstreth (Hrsg.) Structuring Politics: Historical Institutionalism in Comparative Perspective, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992. Google Scholar öffnen
  425. Thiedemann, Hilke, Judicial Independence. Eine rechtsvergleichende Untersuchung der Sicherung unabhängiger Rechtsprechung in Südafrika und Deutschland, Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2007. Google Scholar öffnen
  426. Thiele, Alexander, Exit vom Brexit? Zur Möglichkeit einer einseitigen Rücknahme der notifizierten Austrittsabsicht nach Art. 50 Abs. 2 EUV – zugleich Anmerkung zum Urteil des EuGH v. 10.12.2018, Rs. C-621/18 (Wightman), Europarecht, Vol. 54, No. 2, 2019, S. 263–273. Google Scholar öffnen
  427. Thomas, Cheryl, Is the Prorogation Case the UK Supreme Court’s Marbury v. Madison: What Makes an Institution-Defining Case?, in: Clarry, Daniel (Hrsg.) The UK Supreme Court Yearbook, Vol. 10: Legal Year 2018–2019, London: Appellate Press, 2021, S. 450–484. Google Scholar öffnen
  428. Thwaites, Rayner, Proof of Foreign Nationality and Citizenship Deprivation: Pham and Competing Approaches to Proof in the British Courts, The Modern Law Review, Vol. 85, No. 6, 2022, S. 1301–1328. Google Scholar öffnen
  429. Tierney, Stephen, Prorogation and the Courts: A Question of Sovereignty, U.K. Const. L. Blog, 17.09.2019, online unter: https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2019/09/17/stephen-tierney-prorogation-and-the-courts-a-question-of-sovereignty/, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  430. Tierney, Stephen, The Territorial Constitution and the Brexit Process, Current Legal Problems, Vol. 72, No. 1, 2019, S. 59–83. Google Scholar öffnen
  431. Tiller, Emerson H., Cross, Frank B., What is Legal Doctrine, Northwestern University School of Law. Public Law and Legal Theory Papers, Paper 41, 2005, online unter: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/76622332.pdf, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  432. Timm, Trevor, At last Julian Assange is free. But it may have come at a high price for press freedom, The Guardian, 25.06.2024, online unter: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/jun/25/julian-assange-wikileaks-press-freedom-biden-administration, abgerufen am 14.08.2024 Google Scholar öffnen
  433. Tomkins, Adam, Of Constitutional Spectres. Review of Eric Barendt: An introduction to Constitutional Law, Public Law, Vol. 1999, S. 525–540. Google Scholar öffnen
  434. Tomkins, Adam, Public Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003. Google Scholar öffnen
  435. Tomkins, Adam, Our Republican Constitution, London: Hart Publishing, 2005. Google Scholar öffnen
  436. Tomkins, Adam, What’s Left of the Political Constitution?, German Law Journal, Vol. 14, Issue 12, 2013, S. 2275–2292. Google Scholar öffnen
  437. Tomkins, Adam, Britain’s Shakespearean Constitution, Law & Liberty, 07.07.2023, online unter: https://lawliberty.org/britains-shakespearean-constitution/, abgerufen am 20.12.2023. Google Scholar öffnen
  438. Tomlinson, Joe, Pickup, Alison, Putting the Cart before the horse? The Confused Empirical Basis for Reform of Cart Judicial Reviews, U.K. Const. L. Blog, 29.03.2021, online unter: https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  439. Travis, Alan, David Cameron condemns supreme court ruling on sex offenders, The Guardian, 16.02.2011, online unter: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2011/feb/16/david-cameron-condemns-court-sex-offenders, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  440. Tridimas, Constantina P., Tridimas, George, Is the UK Supreme Court rogue to un-prorogue Parliament?, European Journal of Law and Economics, Vol. 49, Issue 2, 2020, S. 205–225. Google Scholar öffnen
  441. Trotter, Sarah, The State of Divorce Law, The Cambridge Law Journal, Vol. 78, Issue 1, 2019, S. 38–41. Google Scholar öffnen
  442. Trueblood, Leah, Brexit and Two Roles for Referendums in the United Kingdom, in: Albert, Richard, Stacey, Richard (Hrsg.) The Limits and Legitimacy of Referendums, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2022, S. 183–201. Google Scholar öffnen
  443. Tugendhat, Michael, Human Rights and the Common Law – Where Next after Kennedy v The Charity Commission? The Jan Grodecki Lecture 2014 (November 9, 2014), University of Leicester School of Law Research Paper No. 14–29, 10.11.2014, online unter: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2521034, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  444. Tugendhat, Thomas, Croft, Laura, The Fog of Law. An introduction to the legal erosion of British fighting power, Policy Exchange, 18.10.2013, online unter: https://policyexchange.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/the-fog-of-law.pdf, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  445. Tushnet, Mark, Constitutional Hardball, The John Marshall Law Review, Vol. 37, Issue 2, 2004, S. 523–553. Google Scholar öffnen
  446. Tushnet, Mark, The New Fourth Branch. Institutions For Protecting Constitutional Democracy”, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2021. Google Scholar öffnen
  447. Tyrrell, Hélène, Human Rights in the UK and the Influence of Foreign Jurisprudence. Oxford [u.a.]: Hart Publishing, 2018. Google Scholar öffnen
  448. UK Constitutional Law Association 2024, online unter: https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  449. UK Constitutional Law Association Blog, 2024, online unter: https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  450. UK Human Rights Blog, 2024, online unter: https://ukhumanrightsblog.com/, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  451. UK Supreme Court Blog, 2024, online unter http://ukscblog.com/, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  452. UK Supreme Court, New artwork, 2024, online unter: https://www.supremecourt.uk/visiting/new-artwork.html, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  453. UK Supreme Court, The Supreme Court Rules 2009, 2009, online unter: https://www.supreme court.uk/docs/uksc_rules_2009.pdf, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  454. UK Supreme Court, Swearing-in ceremony, 13.01.2020, online unter: https://www.supremecourt.uk /news/swearing-in-of-the-supreme-court-president-and-new-justice.html, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  455. UK Supreme Court, Biographies of the Justices, 2024, online unter: https://www.supremecourt.uk/ about/biographies-of-the-justices.html, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  456. UK Supreme Court, Cases, 2024, online unter: https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/index.html, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  457. UK Supreme Court, Decided Cases, 2024, online unter: https://www.supremecourt.uk/decided-cases/index.html, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  458. UK Supreme Court, Official profile of the highest court in the UK, 2024, online unter: https://twitter.com/UKSupremeCourt, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  459. UK Supreme Court, Speeches, 2024, online unter: https://www.supremecourt.uk/news/speeches. html, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  460. UK Supreme Court, YouTube-Account, 2024, online unter: https://www.youtube.com/uksupreme court, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  461. UK Supreme Court, Annual Report and Accounts 2009–2010, London: The Stationary Office, 2010. Google Scholar öffnen
  462. UK Supreme Court, Annual Report and Accounts 2010–2011, London: The Stationary Office, 2011. Google Scholar öffnen
  463. UK Supreme Court, Annual Report and Accounts 2011–2012, London: The Stationary Office, 2012. Google Scholar öffnen
  464. UK Supreme Court, Annual Report and Accounts 2012–2013, London: The Stationary Office, 2013. Google Scholar öffnen
  465. UK Supreme Court, Annual Report and Accounts 2013–2014, London: The Stationary Office, 2014. Google Scholar öffnen
  466. UK Supreme Court, Annual Report and Accounts 2014–2015, London: The Stationary Office, 2015. Google Scholar öffnen
  467. UK Supreme Court, Annual Report and Accounts 2015–2016, London: The Stationary Office, 2016. Google Scholar öffnen
  468. UK Supreme Court, Annual Report and Accounts 2016–2017, London: The Stationary Office, 2017. Google Scholar öffnen
  469. UK Supreme Court, Annual Report and Accounts 2017–2018, London: The Stationary Office, 2018. Google Scholar öffnen
  470. UK Supreme Court, Annual Report and Accounts 2018–2019, London: The Stationary Office, 2019. Google Scholar öffnen
  471. UK Supreme Court, Annual Report and Accounts 2019–2020, London: The Stationary Office, 2020. Google Scholar öffnen
  472. UK Supreme Court, Guide to Conduct for Members of the Supplementary Panel, August 2021, online unter: https://www.supremecourt.uk/docs/guide-to-conduct-for-members-of-the-supplementary-panel-final.pdf, abgerufen am 14.08.2024 Google Scholar öffnen
  473. UK Supreme Court, Panel number criteria, 2024, online: https://www.supremecourt.uk/procedures/ panel-numbers-criteria.html. Google Scholar öffnen
  474. UK Supreme Court, Permission to Appeal – March 2022, 2024, online unter: https://www.supreme court.uk/pta/permission-to-appeal-march-2022.html, abgerufen am 14.08.2024 Google Scholar öffnen
  475. UK Supreme Court, Permission to appeal, 2024, online unter: https://www.supremecourt.uk/permission-to-appeal.html abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  476. Vallinder, Torbjörn, The Judicialization of Politics – A World-wide Phenomenon: Introduction, International Political Science Review, Vol. 15, No. 2, 1994, S. 91–99. Google Scholar öffnen
  477. van Ooyen, Robert, Eine „europafeindliche“ Kontinuität? Zum Politikverständnis der Lissabon-Entscheidung des Bundesverfassungsgerichts, Journal für Internationale Politik und Gesellschaft, 4/2009, S. 26–45. Google Scholar öffnen
  478. Vanoni, Luca Pietro, New challanges to the separation of powers: the role of constitutional courts, in: Baraggia, Antonia, Fasone, Cristina, Vanoni, Luca Pietro (Hrsg.) New Challenges to the Separation of Powers. Diving Powers., Chelterham [UK]; Northampton [MA, USA]: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, 2020, S. 46–77. Google Scholar öffnen
  479. Varuhas, Jason N. E., The Principle of Legality, Cambridge Law Journal, Vol. 79, Issue 3, 2020, 578–614. Google Scholar öffnen
  480. Vauchez, Antoine, The transnational politics of judicialization. Van Gen den Loos and the making of EU policy, European Law Journal, Vol. 16, No. 1, January 2010, S. 1–28. Google Scholar öffnen
  481. Virgo, Graham, Patel v Mirza: one step forward and two steps back, Trust & Trustees, Vol. 22, No. 10, 2016, S. 1090–1097. Google Scholar öffnen
  482. Vorländer, Hans, Regiert Karlsruhe mit? Das Bundesverfassungsgericht zwischen Recht und Politik, Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte, Jg. 65, 35/36, 2011, S.15 – 23. Google Scholar öffnen
  483. Wade, H. W. R., Sovereignty: Revolution or Evolution?, Law Quarterly Review, Vol. 112, 1996, S. 568–575. Google Scholar öffnen
  484. Wade, Marianne, Fighting Terrorism – the Unprincipled Approach: the UK, the War on Terror and Criminal Law, in: Marianne Wade, Almir Maljević (Hrsg.) A War on Terror? The European Stance on a New Threat, Changing Laws and Human Rights Implications, New York [u.a.]: Springer, 2009, S. 401–427. Google Scholar öffnen
  485. Weill, Rivka, Did Israel Lose its Sanity?: The Struggle over the Reasonableness Doctrine, Verfassungsblog, 12.07.2023, online unter https://verfassungsblog.de/did-israel-lose-its-sanity/, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  486. Weill, Rivka, The Folly of the Israeli Government in Restricting Reasonableness, Verfassungsblog, 26.07.2023, online unter: https://verfassungsblog.de/the-folly-of-the-israeli-government-in-restricting-reasonableness/, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  487. Welsh, Jennifer M., Edmund Burke and International Relations: The Commonwealth of Europe and the Crusade against the French Revolution. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1995. Google Scholar öffnen
  488. Wicks, Elizabeth, The Supreme Court Judgment in Nicklinson: One Step Forward on Assisted Dying; Two Steps Back on Human Rights, Medical Law Review, Vol. 23, No. 1, 2015, S. 144–156. Google Scholar öffnen
  489. Wicks, Elizabeth, Nicklinson and Lamb v United Kingdom: Strasbourg Fails to Assist on Assisted Dying in the UK, Medical Law Review, Vol. 24, No. 4, 2016, S. 633–640. Google Scholar öffnen
  490. Wicks, Elizabeth, Assisted dying reframed in the context of English law’s approach to suicide, Medical Law International, 2020, Vol. 20, Issue 4, S. 287–307. Google Scholar öffnen
  491. Wilde, Mark Laurence, All the Queen’s horses: statutory authority and HS2, Legal Studies, Vol. 37, Issue 4, 2017, S. 765–785. Google Scholar öffnen
  492. Wilson Stark, Shona, In Re Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission’s Application for Judicial Review [2018] UKSC 27: A Declaration in All but Name?, U.K. Const. L. Blog, 12.06.2018, online unter https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  493. Wilson Stark, Shona, Northern Ireland’s Abortion Legislation: Procedural and Substantive Confusion over Declaration of Incompatibility, The Cambridge Law Journal, Vol. 77, Issue 3, November 2018, S. 448–451. Google Scholar öffnen
  494. Wilson, Geoffrey, Postscript: The Courts, Law and Convention, in: Nolan, Michael Patrick, Sedley, Stephen (Hrsg.) The Making and Remaking of the British Constitution, London: Blackstone Press, 1997, 95–133. Google Scholar öffnen
  495. Woodhouse, Diana, United Kingdom. The Constitutional Reform Act 2005 – defending judicial independence the English way, International Journal of Constitutional Law, Vol. 5, No. 1, 2007, S. 153–165. Google Scholar öffnen
  496. Wyatt, Derrick, Should the UK Supreme Court be abolished?, in: Wyatt, Derrick, Ekins, Richard, Reforming the Supreme Court, Policy Exchange, 31.07.2020, online unter: https://policyexchange.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/Reforming-the-Supreme-Court.pdf, abgerufen am 14.08.2024, S. 7–12. Google Scholar öffnen
  497. Young, Alision L., Birkinshaw, Patrick, Mitsilegas, Valsamis, Christou, Theodra A., Europe’s Gift to the United Kingdom’ Unwritten Constitution – Juridification, in: Albi, A., Bardutzky, S. (Hrsg.) National Constitutions in European and Global Governance: Democracy, Rights, the Rule of Law, The Hague: Asser Press, 2019, S. 83–139. Google Scholar öffnen
  498. Young, Alison L., R (Evans) v Attorney General [2015] UKSC 21 – the Anisminic of the 21st Century?, U.K. Const. L. Blog, 31.03.2015, online unter http://ukconstitutionallaw.org, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  499. Young, Alison L., Democratic Dialogue and the Constitution. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017. Google Scholar öffnen
  500. Young, Alison L., The Presumption that Legislative Provisions do not Bind the Crown: Proposed Modification Goes up in Smoke, The Cambridge Law Journal, Vol. 77, Issue 2, July 2018, S. 237–240. Google Scholar öffnen
  501. Young, Alison L., The Prorogation Case: Re-Inventing the Constitution or Re-Imagining Constitutional Scholarship?, in: Clarry, Daniel (Hrsg.) The UK Supreme Court Yearbook, Vol. 10: Legal Year 2018–2019, London: Appellate Press, 2021, S. 357–389. Google Scholar öffnen
  502. Yowell, Paul, Britain’s Constitutional Crisis, First Things, 29.09.2019, online unter: https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2019/09/britains-constitutional-crisis, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  503. *** Google Scholar öffnen
  504. Reden der Richter Google Scholar öffnen
  505. Lady Hale, Salford Human Rights Conference 2010, 04.06.2010. Google Scholar öffnen
  506. Lady Hale, The Supreme Court First Anniversary Seminar: 30 September 2010, Judgment writing in the Supreme Court, 30.09.2010. Google Scholar öffnen
  507. Lady Hale, Argentoratum Locutum: Is The Supreme Court Supreme?, Nottingham Human Rights Lecture 2011, 01.12.2011. Google Scholar öffnen
  508. Lady Hale, Should judges be socio-legal scholars? Socio-Legal Studies Association 2013 Conference, 26.03.2013. Google Scholar öffnen
  509. Lady Hale, What’s the point of human rights?, Warwick Law Lecture 2013, 28.11.2013. Google Scholar öffnen
  510. Lady Hale, UK Constitutionalism on the March?, Keynote address to the Constitutional and Administrative Law Bar Association Conference 2014, 12.07.2014. Google Scholar öffnen
  511. Lady Hale, Appointments to the Supreme Court, Conference to mark the tenth anniversary of the Judicial Appointments Commission, University of Birmingham, 06.11.2015. Google Scholar öffnen
  512. Lady Hale, The Bryce Lecture 2015: The Supreme Court in the United Kingdom Constitution, Somerville College, Oxford, 5.02.2015. Google Scholar öffnen
  513. Lady Hale, The Supreme Court: Guardian of the Constitution?, Sultan Azlan Shah Lecture 2016, Kuala Lumpur, 09.11.2016. Google Scholar öffnen
  514. Lady Hale, The United Kingdom Constitution on the move, The Canadian Institute for Advanced Legal Studies’ Cambridge Lectures 2017, 07.07.2017. Google Scholar öffnen
  515. Lady Hale, Devolution and the Supreme Court, 20 Years On, 14.06.2018. Google Scholar öffnen
  516. Lady Hale, Human Rights and Family Life in the United Kingdom and Islands, Caroline Weatherill Memorial Lecture 2018, 05.12.2018, Google Scholar öffnen
  517. Lady Hale, Press Summary, R (on the application of Miller) (Appellant) v The Prime Minister (Respondent) Cherry and others (Respondents) v Advocate General for Scotland (Appellant) (Scotland), S. 4, online unter: https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2019-0192-summary.pdf, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen
  518. Lady Hale, Moral Courage in the Law, The Worchester Lecture 2019, Worchester Cathedral, 21.02.2019. Google Scholar öffnen
  519. Lady Hale, What is the United Kingdom Supreme Court for?, Macfayden Lecture 2019, Edinburgh, 28.03.2019. Google Scholar öffnen
  520. Lady Hale, Law and Politics: A Reply to Reith Dame Frances Patterson Memorial Lecture 2019, 08.10.2019. Google Scholar öffnen
  521. Lady Hale, 2018, Keynote Speech, Resolution’s 30th National Conference, Bristol, 20.04.2018 Google Scholar öffnen
  522. Lord Carnwarth, From Rationality to Proportionality in the Modern Law, UCL-HKU conference „Judicial review in a changing society“, Hong Kong University, 14.04.2014 Google Scholar öffnen
  523. Lord Clarke, The Supreme Court – One Year on, Bracton Law Lecture, University of Exeter, 11.11.2010. Google Scholar öffnen
  524. Lord Dyson, Are Judges too powerful?, Presidential Address 2014, Bentham Association, 13.03.2014. Google Scholar öffnen
  525. Lord Dyson, Is Judicial Review a Threat to Democracy?, The Sultan Azlan Shah Lecture, 24.11.2015. Google Scholar öffnen
  526. Lord Hodge, The scope of judicial law-making in the common law tradition, Max Planck Institute of Comparative and International Private Law, Hamburg, Germany, 28.10.2019 Google Scholar öffnen
  527. Lord Hope, Do we really need a Supreme Court, Newcastle Law School, 25.11.2010. Google Scholar öffnen
  528. Lord Hope, Taking the case to London – maybe it’s not over after all, Edinburgh, Edinburgh Center for Commercial Law, 12.03.2010. Google Scholar öffnen
  529. Lord Hope, The Creation of the Supreme Court – Was it worth it?, Barnard’s Inn Reading, 24.06.2010. Google Scholar öffnen
  530. Lord Hope, Sovereignty in Question, WG Hart Legal Workshop 2011. A view from the Bench, 28.06.2011. Google Scholar öffnen
  531. Lord Hope, The role of the Supreme Court in protecting the rights of the individual in a jurisdiction with no written constitution, Remarks made to introduce the Glasgow Bar Association Seminar, 9.12.2011. Google Scholar öffnen
  532. Lord Irvine, A British Interpretation of Convention Rights, The Bingham Center for the Rule of Law, 14.12.2011, online unter: https://www.biicl.org/files/5786_lord_irvine_convention_rights.pdf (abgerufen am 14.08.2024) Google Scholar öffnen
  533. Lord Kerr, The UK Supreme Court. The modest underworker of Strasbourg?, Clifford Chance Lecture, 25.01.2012. Google Scholar öffnen
  534. Lord Mance, Destruction or Metamorphosis of the Legal Order?, World Policy Conference, Monaco, 14.12.2013. Google Scholar öffnen
  535. Lord Mance, International Law in the UK Supreme Court, Clarry, Daniel (Hrsg.) The UK Supreme Court Yearbook, Vol. 8: Legal Year 2016–2017, London: Appellate Press, 2018, S. 115–130. Google Scholar öffnen
  536. Lord Neuberger, Who are the masters now?, Second Lord Alexander of Weedon Lecture, 06.04.2011. Google Scholar öffnen
  537. Lord Neuberger, Developing Equity – A View from the Court of Appeal, Chancery Bar Association Conference 2012, 20.01.2012. Google Scholar öffnen
  538. Lord Neuberger, Judges and Policy: A Delicate Balance, Institute for Government, 18.06.2013. Google Scholar öffnen
  539. Lord Neuberger, Sausages and the Judicial Process: the Limits of Transparency, Annual Conference of the Supreme Court of New South Wales, Sydney, 01.08.2014. Google Scholar öffnen
  540. Lord Neuberger, The British and Europe, Cambridge Freshfields Annual Law Lecture 2014, 12.02.2014. Google Scholar öffnen
  541. Lord Neuberger, The Future of the Bar, Bar Councils of Northern Ireland, Belfast, 20.06.2014. Google Scholar öffnen
  542. Lord Neuberger, The role of judges in human rights jurisprudence: a comparison of the Australian and UK experience, Supreme Court of Victoria, Melbourne, 08.08.2014. Google Scholar öffnen
  543. Lord Neuberger, The Supreme Court and the Rule of Law, The Conkerton Lecture 2014, Liverpool Law Society, 09.10.2014. Google Scholar öffnen
  544. Lord Neuberger, The UK Constitutional Settlement and the Role of the UK Supreme Court, Legal Wales Conference 2014, 10.10.2014. Google Scholar öffnen
  545. Lord Neuberger, Tweaking the Curial Veil, The Blackstone Lecture 2014, Pembroke College, Oxford, 15.11.2014. Google Scholar öffnen
  546. Lord Neuberger, ‘Judge not, that ye be not judged’: judging judicial decision-making, F A Mann Lecture 2015, 29.01.2015. Google Scholar öffnen
  547. Lord Neuberger, Has the identity of the Common Law been eroded by EU Laws and the European Convention on Human Rights? Faculty of Law, National University of Singapore, 18.06.2016. Google Scholar öffnen
  548. Lord Neuberger, Some thoughts on judicial reasoning across jurisdictions, 2016 Mitchell Lecture, Edinburgh, 11.11.2016. Google Scholar öffnen
  549. Lord Neuberger, The constitutional role of the Supreme Court in the context of Devolution in the UK, Lord Rodger Memorial Lecture 2016, 14.10.2016. Google Scholar öffnen
  550. Lord Neuberger, The Role of the Supreme Court Seven Years On – Lessons Learnt, Bar Council Law Reform Lecture 2016, 21.11.2016. Google Scholar öffnen
  551. Lord Neuberger, Reflections on significant moments in the role of the judiciary, Personal Support Unit Fundraising Breakfast, 16.03.2017. Google Scholar öffnen
  552. Lord Neuberger, The Supreme Court and the Rule of Law, The Conkerton Lecture 2014, Liverpool Law Society, 09.10.2014. Google Scholar öffnen
  553. Lord Phillips, Gresham Special Lecture at the Lincoln’s Inn, 08.06.2010. Google Scholar öffnen
  554. Lord Phillips, Judicial Independence and Accountability: A View from the Supreme Court, UCL Constitution Unit, 08.2.2011. Google Scholar öffnen
  555. Lord Reed, Scotland’s Devolution Settlement and the Role of the Courts, The Inaugural Dover House Lecture, London, 27.02.2019. Google Scholar öffnen
  556. Lord Reed, The Supreme Court Ten Years On, The Bentham Association Lecture 2019, University College London, 06.03.2019. Google Scholar öffnen
  557. Lord Sumption, Home Truths about Judicial Diversity, Bar Council Law Reform Lecture, 15.11.2012. Google Scholar öffnen
  558. Lord Toulson, International Influence on the Common Law, London Common Law and Commercial Bar Association, 11.11.2014. Google Scholar öffnen
  559. Lord Toulson, Fundamental Rights and the Common Law, Fundamental Rights Conference: A Public Law Perspective, LSE, 10.10.2015. Google Scholar öffnen
  560. The Right Hon. The Lord Burnett of Maldon, Becoming Stronger Together, Commonwealth Judges and Magistrates’ Association Annual Conference 2018, Brisbane, Australia, 10.09.2018, S. 11, online unter: https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/lcj-speech-brisbane-lecture-20180910.pdf, abgerufen am 14.08.2024. Google Scholar öffnen

Ähnliche Veröffentlichungen

aus dem Schwerpunkt "Allgemeine Grundlagen des Rechts & Rechtsgeschichte", "Staatsrecht & Verfassungsrecht", "Regierung & Regierungslehre & Verwaltung"
Cover des Buchs: Deutsche Konsulargerichtsbarkeit im Osmanischen Reich (1761–1917)
Monographie Kein Zugriff
Lars Regula
Deutsche Konsulargerichtsbarkeit im Osmanischen Reich (1761–1917)
Cover des Buchs: 'De libertate imperfecta rusticorum in Germania‘
Monographie Kein Zugriff
Konstantin Knobloch
'De libertate imperfecta rusticorum in Germania‘
Cover des Buchs: Der Volkseinwand
Monographie Kein Zugriff
Florian Feigl
Der Volkseinwand
Cover des Buchs: Future-Proofing in Public Law
Sammelband Kein Zugriff
Nicole Koblenz LL.M., Nicholas Otto, Gernot Sydow
Future-Proofing in Public Law
Cover des Buchs: Die politische Rechte in Lateinamerika
Sammelband Vollzugriff
Nadja Ahmad, Hans-Jürgen Burchardt, Kristina Dietz, Hannes Warnecke-Berger, Jonas Wolff
Die politische Rechte in Lateinamerika

Hinweis

Dieses Werk ist urheberrechtlich geschützt und darf nur nach den Vorgaben der Nutzungs- und Lizenzvereinbarung genutzt werden. Jede darüber hinaus gehende Nutzung des Werkes ist ausdrücklich untersagt und wird verfolgt.

Feedback geben

Wir freuen uns über Ihr Feedback zu Inhalten und Funktionen. Ihre Nachricht hilft uns, unseren Service stetig zu verbessern.

Bewertung
Bild anhängen
oder hier ablegen
PNG oder JPG (max. 3 MB)

Anmelden

Passwort vergessen?
Login via Open Athens
Noch kein Benutzerkonto?
Jetzt registrieren

Publikation zitieren

Download: RIS BibTex