Cover des Buchs: Protecting Muslim Minority Women's Human Rights at Divorce
Im Shop erwerben
, um zu prüfen, ob Sie einen Vollzugriff auf diese Publikation haben.
Monographie Kein Zugriff

Protecting Muslim Minority Women's Human Rights at Divorce

Application of the Protection against Discrimination Guarantee in Norwegian Domestic Law, Private International Law and Human Rights Law
Autor:innen:
Reihe:
Oslo Legal Studies, Band 2
Verlag:
 2017

Zusammenfassung

Die Studie untersucht die Notwendigkeit eines effektiven Rechtsschutzes für muslimische Frauen nach der Auflösung einer Ehe. Gerade der Schutz vor Diskriminierung betrifft eine Vielzahl von Rechtsgebieten, die von informellen Streitbeilegungsmechanismen über die öffentliche Verwaltung bis hin zum nationalen und internationalen Privatrecht reichen.

Ausgangspunkt für die rechtliche Analyse sind Daten aus 13 Interviews mit geschiedenen muslimischen Einwanderinnen in Norwegen. Vergleichend werden dabei ebenfalls die Erfahrungen aus Großbritannien und Kanada mit sogenannten Scharia Councils in den Blick genommen.

Tone Linn Wærstad arbeitet als Postdoctor am Institut für Privatrecht der Universität Oslo, Norwegen. Sie forscht zum Familienrecht, zu transnationalen Familienbeziehungen, internationalen Privatrecht, Frauen- und Menschenrechten.

Publikation durchsuchen

Bibliographische Angaben

Copyrightjahr
2017
ISBN-Print
978-3-8487-3927-1
ISBN-Online
978-3-8452-8252-7
Verlag
Nomos, Baden-Baden
Reihe
Oslo Legal Studies
Band
2
Sprache
Englisch
Seiten
384
Produkttyp
Monographie

Inhaltsverzeichnis

KapitelSeiten
  1. Titelei/Inhaltsverzeichnis Kein Zugriff 1 - 22
      1. 1.1 Aim and research question Kein Zugriff
      2. 1.2 Relevance, identifying and contributing to closing the knowledge gap Kein Zugriff
      3. 1.3 Scope and limitations Kein Zugriff
      4. 1.4 Language, terminology and concepts Kein Zugriff
      5. 1.5 Parts and chapters Kein Zugriff
      1. 2.1 General features of the methodology Kein Zugriff
      2. 2.2 Approaching the study of religious laws in Norway through theories of legal pluralism Kein Zugriff
        1. 2.3.1 Introduction Kein Zugriff
        2. 2.3.2 The research design: frame, access and consent, ethics Kein Zugriff
        3. 2.3.3 Bringing forth the voice and visibility of women Kein Zugriff
        4. 2.3.4 Limitations and significance Kein Zugriff
        1. 2.4.1 Introduction Kein Zugriff
        2. 2.4.2 Interpretation of international human rights Kein Zugriff
        3. 2.4.3 The international human rights conventions’ monitoring mechanisms Kein Zugriff
        4. 2.4.4 The legal value of treaty bodies’ interpretations Kein Zugriff
        5. 2.4.5 A process oriented approach to international law Kein Zugriff
        6. 2.4.6 The legal relationship between the constitution, ordinary law and international human rights when deciding on protection against discrimination Kein Zugriff
      1. 3.1 Introduction: Relevance and challenges in researching Muslim family laws and traditions in relation to women’s protection against discrimination at the dissolution of marriage Kein Zugriff
      2. 3.2 Presentation of Muslim legal sources and principles for interpretation Kein Zugriff
      3. 3.3 Feminist perspectives on Muslim family law Kein Zugriff
      4. 3.4 Sources of Muslim law in this project Kein Zugriff
      5. 3.5 The different modalities of divorce in Muslim laws and traditions Kein Zugriff
      6. 3.6 Muslim divorce laws, customs and women’s lived realities Kein Zugriff
      7. 3.7 Summary Kein Zugriff
      1. 4.1 Introduction Kein Zugriff
      2. 4.2 The legal design of discrimination Kein Zugriff
        1. 4.3.1 Introduction Kein Zugriff
        2. 4.3.2 Definition of structural discrimination Kein Zugriff
        3. 4.3.3 The importance of the concept of structural discrimination Kein Zugriff
        4. 4.3.4 The concept of structural discrimination when deciding upon the range of the protection against discrimination Kein Zugriff
          1. 4.3.5.1 Introduction Kein Zugriff
          2. 4.3.5.2 Balancing the right to protection against discrimination against the right to cultural and religious freedom Kein Zugriff
          3. 4.3.5.3 The private/public distinction Kein Zugriff
        6. 4.3.6 Summary Kein Zugriff
        1. 4.4.1 Introduction Kein Zugriff
        2. 4.4.2 Addressing intersectional discrimination in domestic and international law Kein Zugriff
        3. 4.4.3 Methodological implications from applying an intersectional perspective Kein Zugriff
        1. 4.5.1 Introduction Kein Zugriff
        2. 4.5.2 The structure of duties under the CEDAW convention Kein Zugriff
        3. 4.5.3 A precautionary approach to securing protection against discrimination Kein Zugriff
      1. 5.1 Introduction Kein Zugriff
      2. 5.2 The examination of the CEDAW Committee’s concluding observations to state parties’ reports Kein Zugriff
        1. 5.3.1 Introduction Kein Zugriff
        2. 5.3.2 Legal sources of interpretation Kein Zugriff
        3. 5.3.3 CEDAW article 16, 1, c and h Kein Zugriff
        4. 5.3.4 The CEDAW Committee’s responses to the great variety among state parties’ legal regimes that are discriminatory at the dissolution of marriage Kein Zugriff
          1. 5.3.5.1 Prohibiting formal discrimination Kein Zugriff
          1. 5.3.6.1 The need to bring family codes and personal status laws in line with the convention Kein Zugriff
          2. 5.3.6.2 The need to register marriages and divorces’ Kein Zugriff
        7. 5.3.7 Prohibiting de facto discrimination, ensuring de facto equality Kein Zugriff
        8. 5.3.8 Concluding remarks Kein Zugriff
        1. 5.4.1 Introduction Kein Zugriff
        2. 5.4.2 The system of dividing marital property upon divorce as set out in article 16, 1, c and h Kein Zugriff
        1. 5.5.1 Introduction Kein Zugriff
        2. 5.5.2 The demand for one unified family law in line with the convention Kein Zugriff
        3. 5.5.3 A system with separate divorce modalities for women and men Kein Zugriff
        4. 5.5.4 Alternative dispute resolution mechanisms Kein Zugriff
        5. 5.5.5 Gender stereotypes entrenched in the system of partition Kein Zugriff
        6. 5.5.6 The system of mahr; the Muslim bridal gift Kein Zugriff
        1. 5.6.1 Introduction Kein Zugriff
        2. 5.6.2 Minority women’s equality rights at the dissolution of marriage Kein Zugriff
      7. 5.7 Summary and the way forward Kein Zugriff
    1. 6 Introduction to women’s equal right to access divorce Kein Zugriff
      1. 7.1 Introduction Kein Zugriff
        1. 7.2.1 Introduction Kein Zugriff
        2. 7.2.2 The duty to mediate and reconcile Kein Zugriff
        3. 7.2.3 Summary Kein Zugriff
      3. 7.3 Comparison Norwegian law and Muslim law regarding mediation and reconciliation Kein Zugriff
        1. 7.4.1 Introduction Kein Zugriff
        2. 7.4.2 Relevant human rights questions Kein Zugriff
        3. 7.4.3 Mediation and reconciliation in the informal sphere in Norway: Kein Zugriff
        4. 7.4.4 Practices of mediation and reconciliation in British sharia councils Kein Zugriff
        5. 7.4.5 The precautionary principle that is embedded in the right to equality at the dissolution of marriage Kein Zugriff
      5. 7.5 Summary Kein Zugriff
      1. 8.1 Introduction Kein Zugriff
        1. 8.2.1 Presentation of the further process concerning the Marriage Act section 7 (l) Kein Zugriff
        2. 8.2.2 Presentation of the further process concerning the proposed change in the Immigration Regulations section 23 Kein Zugriff
      3. 8.3 How may a delegation of the talaq divorce remedy discrimination against women? Kein Zugriff
      4. 8.4 Would the proposals fulfil Norwegian human rights obligations? Kein Zugriff
      5. 8.5 Some problematic features of the process seen in light of women’s right to protection against discrimination Kein Zugriff
      6. 8.6 Summary Kein Zugriff
      1. 9.1 Introduction Kein Zugriff
        1. 9.2.1 Introduction Kein Zugriff
        2. 9.2.2 The talaq modality Kein Zugriff
      3. 9.3 Legal questions that arise regarding recognition of talaq divorces in the light of international human rights regulation Kein Zugriff
        1. 9.4.1 Introduction Kein Zugriff
          1. 9.4.2.1 Introduction Kein Zugriff
        3. 9.4.3 The result of the foreign rule Kein Zugriff
        4. 9.4.4 The procedural ordre public reservation Kein Zugriff
        5. 9.4.5 The assessment of the ordre public reservation seen in the light of the guarantee of protection against discrimination Kein Zugriff
        1. 9.5.1 Introduction Kein Zugriff
        2. 9.5.2 The attachment criterion Kein Zugriff
        3. 9.5.3 The situation of the individual woman Kein Zugriff
        4. 9.5.4 The Exception in the Foreign Divorce Act section 3 Kein Zugriff
        5. 9.5.5 Parties’ procedural guarantees in cases of recognition of foreign divorces Kein Zugriff
      6. 9.6 Summary of observations so far Kein Zugriff
      1. 10.1 Introduction Kein Zugriff
        1. 10.2.1 Introduction Kein Zugriff
        2. 10.2.2 Participatory observation Kein Zugriff
        3. 10.2.3 Ethical aspects Kein Zugriff
        1. 10.3.1 Introduction Kein Zugriff
        2. 10.3.2 Maya’s story Kein Zugriff
        3. 10.3.3 The procedural guarantee of advance notification before an administrative decision is made Kein Zugriff
        4. 10.3.4 The procedural guarantee to acquaint oneself with the documents in the case Kein Zugriff
        5. 10.3.5 The procedural guarantee to be notified about the administrative decision Kein Zugriff
        1. 10.4.1 Introduction Kein Zugriff
        2. 10.4.2 Salma’s story Kein Zugriff
        3. 10.4.3 Other examples Kein Zugriff
        4. 10.4.4 “Invisible” women in the review Kein Zugriff
        1. 10.5.1 Introduction Kein Zugriff
        2. 10.5.2 The requirements of the right to a fair trial Kein Zugriff
      6. 10.6 The focus upon attachment in the understanding of the ordre public reservation in the Foreign Divorce Act section 2 Kein Zugriff
      7. 10.7 Summary Kein Zugriff
      1. 11.1 Introduction Kein Zugriff
        1. 11.2.1 Separate property regimes Kein Zugriff
        2. 11.2.2 Rights and duties within marriage for men and women and the importance of non-financial contributions Kein Zugriff
        3. 11.2.3 Contractual negotiations prior to the wedding or during the marriage Kein Zugriff
        4. 11.2.4 Mahr Kein Zugriff
        5. 11.2.5 Private ordering of the partition Kein Zugriff
        1. 11.3.1 Traditional Muslim marital property regime within marriage and at its dissolution Kein Zugriff
        2. 11.3.2 Contractual regulation of marital property Kein Zugriff
        1. 11.4.1 Overview of the regulation of property relations between the spouses under Norwegian law Kein Zugriff
          1. 11.4.2.1 Introduction Kein Zugriff
          2. 11.4.2.2 Duty to provide support for the family Kein Zugriff
          3. 11.4.2.3 Acquisition of joint ownership to assets by contribution in the home and care of the family Kein Zugriff
        3. 11.4.3 Limits upon contractual freedom between the spouses I: Concerning types of contract. Kein Zugriff
        4. 11.4.4 Limits upon contractual freedom between spouses II: demands for reasonableness. Kein Zugriff
          1. 11.4.5.1 The access to a contract that makes an exception to the spousal joint ownership rule Kein Zugriff
          2. 11.4.5.2 The regulation of mahr Kein Zugriff
        6. 11.4.6 The possibilities for faith-based arbitration in Norwegian law Kein Zugriff
        1. 11.5.1 Introduction Kein Zugriff
        2. 11.5.2 The principle of domicile and the immutability of the matrimonial property Kein Zugriff
        3. 11.5.3 Internal mandatory rules that make exceptions to the choice of law rules Kein Zugriff
        4. 11.5.4 Choice of law rules regarding matrimonial property when the wife has enabled the husband to acquire assets that are for personal use for the couple Kein Zugriff
        5. 11.5.5 Questions related to disputes over mahr that have attachment to foreign jurisdictions Kein Zugriff
          1. 11.5.6.1 Introduction Kein Zugriff
          2. 11.5.6.2 The principle of attachment Kein Zugriff
          1. 11.5.7.1 Introduction Kein Zugriff
          2. 11.5.7.2 The legal status of party autonomy to choice of law regarding the matrimonial property regime Kein Zugriff
          3. 11.5.7.3 Legal arguments concerning party autonomy Kein Zugriff
          4. 11.5.7.4 Legal political arguments concerning party autonomy Kein Zugriff
          5. 11.5.7.5 The concerns of the weaker party in the marriage Kein Zugriff
          6. 11.5.7.6 How would a system of party autonomy supplemented with interpretative rules /rules of censorship affect Muslim minority women? Kein Zugriff
          7. 11.5.7.7 Do the legal political arguments imply that there has been a shift towards party autonomy in Norway? Kein Zugriff
      6. 11.6 Summary Kein Zugriff
      1. 12.1 Introduction Kein Zugriff
      2. 12.2 Who are affected by these issues? Kein Zugriff
      3. 12.3 Relevant human rights’ regulation regarding rights to cultural and religious freedom and women’s right to protection against discrimination Kein Zugriff
        1. 12.4.1 Introduction Kein Zugriff
        2. 12.4.2 Requirements concerning the parties Kein Zugriff
        3. 12.4.3 Requirements concerning the arbitrator (muhakkam) Kein Zugriff
          1. 12.4.4.1 The contract of tahkim Kein Zugriff
          2. 12.4.4.2 The conduct and judging of the arbitrators Kein Zugriff
          3. 12.4.4.3 The subject matter of arbitration (tahkim) Kein Zugriff
        5. 12.4.5 The substantive law regarding partition of assets in Muslim family law Kein Zugriff
        6. 12.4.6 Summary Kein Zugriff
      5. 12.5 Overview of the law of arbitration in Ontario prior to the “sharia” controversy Kein Zugriff
        1. 12.6.1 Introduction Kein Zugriff
        2. 12.6.2 What rules may be chosen to govern arbitration? Kein Zugriff
        3. 12.6.3 Safeguards and judicial review of arbitral agreements and awards Kein Zugriff
        4. 12.6.4 Summary Kein Zugriff
        1. 12.7.1 Presentation of the Ontario Arbitration process Kein Zugriff
          1. 12.7.2.1 Introduction Kein Zugriff
          2. 12.7.2.2 The fear that women would be forced to partake in faith-based arbitration Kein Zugriff
          3. 12.7.2.3 The fear that women would be exposed to discriminatory norms in the arbitration tribunals Kein Zugriff
          4. 12.7.2.4 Concluding remarks regarding Marion Boyd’s report Kein Zugriff
        3. 12.7.3 Phase 2: The ban of faith-based arbitration Kein Zugriff
        1. 12.8.1 Introduction Kein Zugriff
        2. 12.8.2 Requirement of voluntariness Kein Zugriff
          1. 12.8.3.1 Introduction Kein Zugriff
          2. 12.8.3.2 Procedure and consequences of faith-based arbitration brought in for judicial review in Norway Kein Zugriff
          3. 12.8.3.3 Actual effects of formal and informal law Kein Zugriff
          4. 12.8.3.4 How to handle risk for discrimination in arbitration procedures Kein Zugriff
        4. 12.8.4 The effects of racism underpinning the ban upon faith-based arbitration Kein Zugriff
      9. 12.9 Summary Kein Zugriff
      1. 13.1 Introduction Kein Zugriff
        1. 13.2.1 Understanding how Muslim family laws may actually impact upon women’s rights situation Kein Zugriff
        2. 13.2.2 Ways of improving approaches to fulfil women’s rights at the dissolution of marriage Kein Zugriff
        1. 13.3.1 Introduction Kein Zugriff
        2. 13.3.2 Integrating international human rights law in the application and interpretation of national law Kein Zugriff
        3. 13.3.3 Developments concerning private international law Kein Zugriff
        4. 13.3.4 The private law concept of freedom of contract and party autonomy Kein Zugriff
      4. 13.4 Policy implications Kein Zugriff
      5. 13.5 Recommendations for future research Kein Zugriff
      6. 13.6 Conclusion Kein Zugriff
  7. 14 References Kein Zugriff 357 - 384

Literaturverzeichnis (269)

  1. Abbate, Lindsay L. 2002. “What God Has Joined “Let” Man Put Asunder: Ireland's Struggle between Canon and Common Law Relating to Divorce.” Emory International Law Review. Fall, 2002, Vol. 16 (2), p.583–637. Google Scholar öffnen
  2. Abu Dawud, Sunan [n.d.]. Kitab al-talaq [Divorce], Book 13, Hadith Number 2178. Google Scholar öffnen
  3. Ahmed, K.N. 1972. The Muslim Law of Divorce. Islamic Research Insitute. Islamabad. Google Scholar öffnen
  4. Alexy, Robert 2002. A Theory of Constitutional Rights. Oxford University Press. Oxford. Google Scholar öffnen
  5. Ali, S.M and A. Whitehouse 1991. Oh! Canada: Whose land, whose dream? Toronto: Canadian Society of Muslims. Google Scholar öffnen
  6. Ali, Shaheen Sardar 1993. An Analysis of the Trends of the Superior Courts of Pakistan in Matters relating to Marriage, Dower, Divorce. Working Paper for the Women and Law project, Women Living Under Muslim Laws. Google Scholar öffnen
  7. Ali, Shaheen Sardar 1997. “Women's Human Rights in Islam: Towards a Theoretical Framework.” Yearbook of Islamic and Middle Eastern law. Vol. 4 (1) pp. 117 -152. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1163/221129898X00062
  8. Ali, Shaheen Sardar 2000. Gender and Human Rights in Islam and International Law: Equal Before Allah, Unequal Before Man? Kluwer Law International. The Hague. London. Boston. Google Scholar öffnen
  9. Ali, Shaheen Sardar 2013. “Authority and authencity: Sharia councils, Muslim women’s rights, and the English courts” Child and Family Law Quarterly Vol 25(2), pp. 113–137. Google Scholar öffnen
  10. Ali, Abdullah Yusuf 1934. The Holy Qur'an: Text, Translation and Commentary. Published online at http://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/16955/pg16955.html Google Scholar öffnen
  11. al-Shafi’i, al-Imam Muhammad b. Idris 1987. al-Risala fi usul-al-fiqh. Treatise on the Foundations of Islamic Jurisprudence. Translated by Majid Khadduri. The Islamic Texts Society. Cambridge Google Scholar öffnen
  12. al-Shawkani, Muhammed bin Ali bin Muhammad. Irshad al-futhul ila tahqiq al-haqq min ‘ilm al-usul. Dar al-fikr. N.d, n.p. Google Scholar öffnen
  13. Al-Zuhayli, Wahbah 1989. al-fiqh al-Islami wa ‘Adillatuhu. Dar al-Fiqr, Damascus 1989, Vol. 6. Google Scholar öffnen
  14. An-Na’im, Abdullahi A. 2008. Islam and the Secular State: Negotiating the Future of Sharia. Harvard University Press. Cambridge, Massachusetts and London, England. Google Scholar öffnen
  15. An-Na’im, Abdullahi A. 1987. “The Rights of Women and International Law in the Muslim Context.” Whittier Law Review. Vol. 9 (3), pp.491–516 Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.2307/761944
  16. Ansari, Zafar Ishaq 1972. “Islamic Juristic Terminology before Shafi’i. A Semantic Analysis with Special Reference to Kufa.” Arabica, Vol. 3, pp. 255–300. Google Scholar öffnen
  17. Arshad, Raffia 2010. Islamic Family Law. Sweet & Maxwell. Thomson Reuters. London. Google Scholar öffnen
  18. Arvidsson, Matilda 2011. Facing the Unknown/Defacing the Known – Mahr in Swedish Courts. In Mehdi R. and Nielsen J. (eds.). Embedding Mahr in the European Legal System. DJØF Publishing, Copenhagen. Google Scholar öffnen
  19. Augdahl, Per 1973. Rettskilder. H.Aschehoug & Co. (W. Nygaard). Oslo. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1016/0584-8539(73)80196-5
  20. Bamforth, Nicolas, Maleiha Malik, and Colm O’Cinneide 2008. Discrimination Law: Theory and Context: Text and Materials. Sweet & Maxwell. London. Google Scholar öffnen
  21. Bakht, Natasha. 2006. “Were Muslim Barbarians Really Knocking on the Gates of Ontario?: The Religious Arbitration Controversy—Another Perspective.” In Ottawa Law Review, 40th Anniversary, 2006. Google Scholar öffnen
  22. Bano, Samia 2004. Complexity, Difference and ‘Muslim Personal Law’: Rethinking the Relationship between Shariah Councils and South Asian Muslim Women in Britain. University of Warwick, Department of Law. Google Scholar öffnen
  23. Bano, Samia 2011. Muslim Marriage and Mahr: The Experiences of British Muslim Women. In Mehdi R. and Nielsen J. (eds.). Embedding Mahr in the European Legal System. DJØF Publishing, Copenhagen. Google Scholar öffnen
  24. Bano, Samia 2012. An exploratory study of Shariah councils in England with respect to family law. University of Reading. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1057/9781137283856_8
  25. Bano, Samia 2007. “Muslim Family Justice and Human Rights: The Experience of British Muslim Women” (Winter 2007). Journal of Comparative Law, Vol. 1 (4). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/15564900701238575
  26. Bar, Ludwig Von 1862. Theorie und Praxis der internationalen Privatrechts. I. Scientia Verlag. 1862. Google Scholar öffnen
  27. Bartlett, Kathrine T. 1990. “Feminist Legal Methods.” Harvard Law Review. Vol. 103 (4), pp. 829–888. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.2307/1341478
  28. Bekkedal, Tarjei 2012. “Felles prosjekt; om sameie i ekteskaps- og samboerforhold.” Jussens Venner. Vol. 47, p. 159–183. Google Scholar öffnen
  29. Benda-Beckmann, Frantz von 2002. “Who’s Afraid of Legal Pluralism?” Journal of legal pluralism and unofficial law. Vol. 34 (47), pp. 37 -82 Google Scholar öffnen
  30. Benda-Beckmann et al. 2005. Mobile People, Mobile Law: Expanding Legal Relations in a Contracting World. Ashgate. Hants. Burlington. (Comment: places correct?) Google Scholar öffnen
  31. Bentzon, Agnete Weis et al. 1998. Pursuing Grounded Theory in Law: South-North Experiences in Developing Women’s Law. Mond Books. Harare. Tano, Aschehoug.Oslo. Google Scholar öffnen
  32. Berg, B. H. (ed.) 2006. Voldgiftsloven med kommentarer. Gyldendal akademisk. Oslo. Google Scholar öffnen
  33. Blake, Susan, Julie Brown and Stuart Sime (eds.) 2011. A Practical Approach to Alternative Dispute Resolution. Oxford University Press. Oxford. Google Scholar öffnen
  34. Blois, Matthijs de 2010. “Religious law versus secular law: The example of the get refusal in Dutch, English and Israeli law.” Utrecht Law Review. Vol. 6 (2). Google Scholar öffnen
  35. Bogdan, Michael, 2007. “Något om den kollisionsrettsliga behandlingen av islamisk morgongåva (MAHR) i Rett og toleranse.” Festskrift til Helge Johan Thue. Gyldendal Akademisk. Oslo. Google Scholar öffnen
  36. Bowen, John 2012. Blaming Islam. MIT Press. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139045988.008
  37. Boyd, M. 2004. Dispute Resolution in Family Law: Protecting Choice, Promoting Inclusion. http://www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.ca/english/about/pubs/boyd/fullreport.pdf Google Scholar öffnen
  38. Bredal, Anja 2005. Vi er jo en familie: Arrangerte ekteskap, autonomi og fellesskap blant unge norsk-asiater. Unipax. Oslo. Google Scholar öffnen
  39. Bredal, Anja and Tone Linn Wærstad 2014. Gift, men ugift: Om utenomrettslige religiøse vigsler. Institutt for samfunnsforskning rapport 2014:06. Google Scholar öffnen
  40. Bull, Kirsti Strøm 1992. Ugift samliv. Tano. Oslo. Google Scholar öffnen
  41. Bull, Kirsti Strøm 1993a. Avtaler mellom ektefeller. Tano. Oslo. Google Scholar öffnen
  42. Bull, Kirsti Strøm 1993b. “Lovvalg i saker om økonomiske forhold mellom ektefeller.” Tidsskrift for Rettsvitenskap. Vol. 106 (5), pp. 525–542. Google Scholar öffnen
  43. Bunt, G. 1998. “Decision-Making Concerns in British Islamic Environments.” Islam and Christian-Muslim Relations. Vol. 9 (1), pp.103–113. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/09596419808721141
  44. Bunting, A. 2009. Family law's legal pluralism: private 'opting-out' in Canada and South Africa. In Breton et al (eds.) Multijuralism: Manifestations, Causes, and Consequences, Ashgate. Google Scholar öffnen
  45. Calitz, K. B. 2009. “The Liability of Employers for the Harassment of Employees by Non-Employees.” Stellenbosch law review. Vol. 20 (3), pp. 407–425. Google Scholar öffnen
  46. Carrol, L and H. Kapoor 1996. Talaq-i-Tafwid. The Muslim Woman’s Contractual Access to Divorce. Women Living under Muslim Laws Readers and Compilation Series. Google Scholar öffnen
  47. Charlesworth, Hillary, Christine Chinkin and Shelley Wright 1991. “Feminist Approaches to International Law.” The American Journal of International Law. Vol. 85 (4), pp. 613–645. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.2307/2203269
  48. Charlesworth Hillary, Christine Chinkin 2000.The boundaries of international law: A feminist analysis. Juris Publishing. Manchester University Press. Manchester. Google Scholar öffnen
  49. Charsley Katharine 2012. Marriage, Migration and Transnational Social Spaces: A View from the UK. In Charsley, Katharine (ed.) Transnational Marriage: New Perspectives from Europe and Beyond. Google Scholar öffnen
  50. Chaudary Muhammad 1999. Justice in Practice: Legal Ethnography of a Pakistani Punjabi Village. Oxford University Press. Karachi. Google Scholar öffnen
  51. Christensen, Camilla 2011. Mahr in Danish Law. In Mehdi R. and Nielsen J. (eds.) Embedding Mahr in the European Legal System. DJØF Publishing, Copenhagen. Google Scholar öffnen
  52. Cook, Rebecca (ed.) 1994. Human Rights of Women. National and International Perspectives. University of Pennsylvania Press. Philadelphia. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.9783/9780812201666
  53. Cordes et al. 2010. Hovedlinjer i internasjonal privatrett. Cappelen akademisk forlag. Google Scholar öffnen
  54. Craig, Ronald 2007. Systemic Discrimination in Employment and the Promotion of Ethnic Equality. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. Leiden. Boston. Google Scholar öffnen
  55. Crenshaw, Kimberle 1989. Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics. The University of Chicago Legal Forum. 1989, pp. 139–167. Google Scholar öffnen
  56. Crenshaw, Kimberle Williams 2000 a. The Intersectionality of Race and Gender. Unpublished, November 8, 2000. The article is part of a collection of articles published in connection with the Conference ”Human Rights at the Interface”, Faculty of Law at the University of Oslo, December 2000. Google Scholar öffnen
  57. Crenshaw, Kimberle Williams 2000. Background Paper for the Expert Meeting on Gender related Aspects of Race Discrimination. November 21–24, 2000, Zagreb Croatia. Published in Bamforth, Nicolas, Maleiha Malik, and Colm O’Cinneide 2008. Discrimination Law: Theory and Context: Text and Materials. Sweet & Maxwell. London. Google Scholar öffnen
  58. Cook, Rebecca J. and Cusack, Simone 2010. Gender Stereotyping: Transnational Legal Perspectives. PENN. University of Pennsylvania Press. Philadelphia. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.9783/9780812205923
  59. Cusack, S. 2013. The CEDAW as a legal framework for transnational discourses on gender stereotyping. In Hellum, A. and Aasen, H. S. (eds.) Women’s Human Rights: CEDAW in International, Regional and National Law. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139540841.007
  60. Dahl, Tove Stang et al. 1975. Juss og juks: en arbeidsbok i likestilling. Pax. Oslo. Google Scholar öffnen
  61. Dahl, Tove Stang (ed.) 1985. Kvinnerett I. Universitetsforlaget. Oslo, Bergen, Stavanger, Tromsø. Google Scholar öffnen
  62. Dahl, Tove Stang 1989. Taking women as starting point. Working Papers in Women’s Law no. 4. Department of Public and International Law. University of Oslo. Google Scholar öffnen
  63. Danielsen, Svend and Peter Lødrup 1988. “Det nordiske samarbeidet på familierettens område.” Tidsskrift for rettsvitenskap. Vol. 101, pp. 565–586. Google Scholar öffnen
  64. Daugstad, Gunlaug 2008. Ekteskap over landegrensene. Ekteskapsmønster og transnasjonale familieetableringar i perioden 1990–2007. Rapporter. Statistisk sentralbyrå. Google Scholar öffnen
  65. De Carli, Eli F. 2008. Muslimske kvinner, haltende ekteskap og skilsmisse – prosessen rundt politiske initiativ til lovendringer. Norsk tidsskrift for migrasjonsforskning, 9 (1), pp. 5–26 Google Scholar öffnen
  66. The Directorate of Integration and Diversity (IMDi) (2013). A Transnational Google Scholar öffnen
  67. Approach: The work against forced marriage and female genital mutilation Google Scholar öffnen
  68. at four Norwegian foreign service mission. http://www.imdi.no/Documents/Rapporter/Paa_tvers_av_landegrenser_eng.pdf Google Scholar öffnen
  69. Doi, A. R. I. 1984. Sharia: The Islamic law. Ta Ha Publishers. London. Google Scholar öffnen
  70. Doublet, D. R. 1995. Rett, vitenskap og fornuft. Et systemteoretisk perspektiv på den rettslige argumentasjons verdimessige forutsetninger. Alma Ater. Bergen. Google Scholar öffnen
  71. Egge-Hoveid, Kristin (2014). Kontantstøtte blant innvandrere. Fortsatt nedgang i kontantstøtten. Artikler, published May 2, 2014. Statistisk sentralbyrå.. Google Scholar öffnen
  72. Eggen, Nora S. 2001. “Islamsk rettskildelære. ” Institutt for offentlig retts skriftserie. Nr. 1/2001. Google Scholar öffnen
  73. El Alami, Dawoud S. 2000. The Marriage Contract in Islamic Law. Arab and Islamic Laws Series. Graham and Trotman. London, Dordrecht, Boston. Google Scholar öffnen
  74. Emon, A. 2006. “Islamic Law and the Canadian Mosaic: Politics, Jurisprudence, and Multicultural Accomodation.” Singapore Journal of Legal Studies. 2006, pp. 331–355. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.947149
  75. Eng, Svein 2007. Rettsfilosofi. Universitetsforlaget. Oslo. Google Scholar öffnen
  76. Engle, Karen 1992. “International Human Rights Law and Feminism: Where Discourses Meet.” In Michigan Journal of International Law. Vol. 13 (3), pp. 517–610. Google Scholar öffnen
  77. Enright, Máiréad 2013. “The beginning of the sharpness: Loyalty, citizenship and Muslim divorce practice”. International Journal of Law in Context. 2013, Vol. 9 (3), pp. 295–317. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1017/S1744552313000141
  78. Esposito, John L. 1982. Women in Muslim Family Law. Syracuse University Press. New York. Google Scholar öffnen
  79. Esposito, John L. 2001. Women in Muslim Family Law. Syracuse University Press. Syracuse. New York. Google Scholar öffnen
  80. Esposito, John L. (ed.) 2003. The Oxford Dictionary of Islam. Oxford University Press. Oxford. Google Scholar öffnen
  81. Fastvold, Marianne and Anne Hellum 1988. “Money and Work in Marriage: Women’s Perspectives on Family Law.” In Institutt for offentlig retts skriftserie, nummer 6: 1988. Institutt for offentlig rett. Universitetet i Oslo. Google Scholar öffnen
  82. Fisher, Elizabeth 2007. Risk Regulation and Administrative Constitutionalism. Hart Publishing. Oxford. Portland Oregon. Google Scholar öffnen
  83. Fleischer, Carl August 1968. Grunnlovens grenser: for lovregulert fastsetting av erstatning ved ekspropriasjon, — særlig ved verdistigning som ikke skyldes grunneiers innsats. Universitetsforlaget. Oslo. Google Scholar öffnen
  84. Fournier, McDougall, Lichtsztral 2012. Secular Rights and Religious Wrongs? Family Law, Religion and Women in Israel. William & Mary Journal of Women and the Law, Vol. 18 (2), pp. 333–362. Google Scholar öffnen
  85. Fournier, P. 2010. Muslim Marriage in Western Courts: Lost in Transplantation. Ashgate. Farnham. Burlington. Google Scholar öffnen
  86. Francois-Cerrah, Myriam 2014. “Why banning Sharia courts would harm British Muslim women.” The Daily Telegraph, 18th July 2014. Google Scholar öffnen
  87. Frantzen, Torstein 2002. Arveoppgjør ved internasjonale ekteskap: Studier av norsk internasjonal privatrett med særlig vekt på gjenlevende ektefelles rettsstilling. Fagbokforlaget. Bergen. Google Scholar öffnen
  88. Fredman, Sandra 2002. Discrimination Law. Oxford University Press. Oxford. Google Scholar öffnen
  89. Fredman, Sandra 2008. Human Rights Transformed: Positive Rights and Positive Duties. Oxford University Press. Oxford. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199272761.003.0009
  90. Fredman, Sandra 2009. Positive rights and positive duties: Addressing intersectionality. In Schiek, Dagmar and Victoria Chege (eds.) European Union Non-Discrimination Law: Comparative perspectives on multidimensional equality law. Routledge. Cavendish. London and New York. Google Scholar öffnen
  91. Fredman, Sandra 2014. Engendering socio-economic rights. In Hellum Anne and Henriette S. Aaasen (eds.) Women’s Human Rights: CEDAW in International, Regional and National Law. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. Google Scholar öffnen
  92. Freeman, Marsha 1995. The Human Rights of Women in the Family. In Peters and Volpers (eds.) Women’s Rights: Human Rights. Routledge, New York. Google Scholar öffnen
  93. Fredriksen, K. J. 2011. Mahr (dower) as a Bargaining Tool in a European Context: a Comparison of Dutch and Norwegian Judicial Decisions. In Mehdi R. and J. Nielsen (eds.) Embedding Mahr in the European Legal System. DJØF Publishing, Copenhagen. Google Scholar öffnen
  94. Freeman, Marsha A. 2009. “Reservations to CEDAW: An Analysis for UNICEF: A Discussion Paper.” Policy and Practice December 2009. UNICEF. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.18356/26b2aa25-en
  95. Giertsen, Johan 1995. “Uskifte og lovvalg”. Tidsskrift for rettsvitenskap.Vol. 108, pp. 261–324. Google Scholar öffnen
  96. Gihl, Torsten 1945. “Kvalifikationsproblemet inom den internationella privaträtten.” Skrifter utgivna av Svenska Bankföreningen. Vol. 77. Stockholm. Google Scholar öffnen
  97. Gihl, Torsten 1951. Den internationella privaträttens historia och allmänna principer. Norstedt. Stockholm. Google Scholar öffnen
  98. Giunchi, Elisa (ed.) 2014. Muslim Family Law in Western Courts. Routledge. London and New York. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.4324/9781315796369-1
  99. Griffiths, John 1986. “What Is Legal Pluralism?” Journal of legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law. 1986, pp. 1–56. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/07329113.1986.10756387
  100. Griffiths, Anne O. 1997. In the Shadow of Marriage: Gender and Justice in an African Community. The University of Chicago Press. Chicago. London. Google Scholar öffnen
  101. Griffiths, Anne 2011. “Pursuing Legal Pluralism: The Power of Paradigms in a Global World”. Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law. Vol. 64, 2011, pp. 173–202. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/07329113.2011.10756674
  102. Grillo, Ralph 2012. In the Shadow of the Law. In Mehdi, R. et al. (eds.) Interpreting Divorce Laws in Islam. DJØF Publishing. Copenhagen. Google Scholar öffnen
  103. Groenman et al. 1997. Het Vrouwenverdrag in Nederland anno 1997, Den Haag: Ministerie van SZW 1997. Google Scholar öffnen
  104. Graver, Hans Petter 2007. Alminnelig forvaltningsrett. Universitetsforlaget. Oslo. Google Scholar öffnen
  105. Hacker, Daphna 2008. “A legal field in action: the case of divorce arrangements in Israel.” International Journal of Law in Context. Vol. 4 (1), pp.1–33. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1017/S1744552308001018
  106. Hallaq, W.B, (2009). Sharī'a: Theory, Practice, Transformations. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. Google Scholar öffnen
  107. Hasan, A. 1994. The Early Development of Islamic Jurisprudence. Adam Publishers & Distributors. Delhi. Google Scholar öffnen
  108. Hanski, R. and M. Scheinin (eds.) 2003. Leading Cases of the Human Rights Committee. Turku : Institute for Human Rights, Åbo Akademi University. Google Scholar öffnen
  109. Hauge, Katrine Broch 2014. Erstatningsnivået ved tvangsovertaking av fallrettar: Analyse av salsverdierstatning og kompensasjonsnorma ved etablering av bruksordningar i lys av ei idealnorm. Dissertations submitted to the Faculty of Law, University of Oslo, 18th December 2014. [Unpublished]. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2014/8067.4303
  110. Hellum, Anne 1999. Women’s Human Rights and Legal Pluralism in Africa: Mixed Norms and Identities in Infertility Management in Zimbabwe. Mond Books. Tano Aschehoug. Oslo. Google Scholar öffnen
  111. Hellum, Anne 2006 a. “Rettferdighet og frihet: Tove Stang Dahls forfatterskap i et nøtteskall.” Prosa Faglitterært tidsskrift. Vol. 12, pp. 16–19. Google Scholar öffnen
  112. Hellum, Anne 2006 b. Menneskerettigheter, pluralisme, kompleksitet og integrasjon.In Fauchald, Ole Kristian, Henning Jakhelln and Aslak Syse (eds.) dog Fred er ej det Bedste: Festskrift til Carl August Fleischer. Universitetsforlaget. Oslo. Google Scholar öffnen
  113. Hellum et al. (eds.) 2011. From Transnational Relations to Transnational Laws: Northern European Laws at the Crossroads. Ashgate. Surrey. Burlington. Google Scholar öffnen
  114. Hellum, Anne and Kirsten Ketscher (eds.) 2008. Diskriminerings- og likestillingsrett. Universitetsforlaget. Oslo. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1055/s-2008-1026380
  115. Hellum (2014). Vern mot sammensatt diskriminering etter internasjonale menneskerettigheter og norsk rett: Kvinner i krysset mellom kjønn og etnisitet. In Hellum, Anne and Julia Köhler-Olsen (eds.) : Like rettigheter – ulike liv: Rettslig kompleksitet I kvinne- barne- og innvandrerperspektiv. Gyldendal Juridisk. Oslo. Google Scholar öffnen
  116. Henriksen, Kristin, Lars Østby, and Dag Ellingsen 2011. Immigration and immigrants 2010. Statistical Analyses. 122/2011. Statistisk sentralbyrå. Google Scholar öffnen
  117. Higgins, Rosalyn 1994. Problems & Process: International Law and How We Use it. Clarendon Press. Oxford. Google Scholar öffnen
  118. Higgins, Rosalyn 2009. Themes and Theories: Selected Essays, Speeches, and Writings in International Law. Vol. 1. Oxford University Press. Oxford. Google Scholar öffnen
  119. Holden, L. 2012. Interpreting Women’s Right of Divorce in Present Day Islamic Family Laws. In Mehdi, R. et al. (eds.) Interpreting Divorce Laws in Islam. DJØF Publishing. Copenhagen. Google Scholar öffnen
  120. Holmøy, Vera and Peter Lødrup 2001. Ekteskapsloven: og enkelte andre lover med kommentarer. Gyldendal Akademisk. Oslo Google Scholar öffnen
  121. Holtmaat, Rikki 2004. Towards Different Law and Public Policy: The significance of Article 5a CEDAW for the elimination of structural gender discrimination. Ministerie van Soziale Zaken en Werkgelegenheid. The Hague. Google Scholar öffnen
  122. Holtmaat, Rikki 2014. The CEDAW: a holistic approach to women’s equality and freedom. In Hellum Anne and Henriette S. Aaasen (eds.) Women’s Human Rights: CEDAW in International, Regional and National Law. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. Google Scholar öffnen
  123. Høgberg, Benedikte Moltumyr 2010. Forbud mot tilbakevirkende lover. Universitetsforlaget. Oslo. Google Scholar öffnen
  124. Ikdahl, Ingunn 2010. Securing women’s homes: The dynamics of women’s human rights at the international level and in Tanzania. Series of dissertations submitted to the Faculty of Law, University of Oslo, No. 31. Google Scholar öffnen
  125. Ikdahl, Ingunn 2015. Noter til “Konvensjon om avskaffelse av alle former for diskriminering av kvinner”. Gyldendal rettsdata. Google Scholar öffnen
  126. Ikdahl, Ingunn 2013. Et lærestykke: Kvinneretten og internasjonaliseringen in Bull, Kirsti Strøm and Marit Halvorsen (eds.) Det juridiske fakultet gjennom 200 år: Kontinuitet og fornyelse. Dreyers forlag A/S. Oslo. Google Scholar öffnen
  127. International Law Association 2004. Report of the Seventy-First Conference (Berlin). London 2004. Google Scholar öffnen
  128. Jänterä-Jareborg, Maarit 1989. Partsautonomi och efterlevande makes rättsställning. Iustus Förlag. Uppsala. Google Scholar öffnen
  129. Jones-Pauly, Christina 2008. Marriage Contracts of Muslims in the Diaspora: Problems in the Recognition of Mahr Contracts in German Law. In Quraishi, Asifa and Frank E. Vogel, (eds.) The Islamic Marriage Contract: Case studies in Islamic Family Law. Harvard University Press. Cambridge, Massachusetts. Google Scholar öffnen
  130. Joseph, Norma Baumel 2011. “Civil Jurisdiction and Religious Accord: Bruker v. Marcowitz in the Supreme Court of Canada”. Studies in Religion / Sciences Religieuses. Vol. 40 (3), pp. 318–336. Google Scholar öffnen
  131. Joseph, Sarah, Jenny Schultz and Melissa Castan 2004. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: Cases, Materials and Commentary. Oxford University Press. Oxford. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.2307/3216728
  132. Jørgensen et al. (eds.) 2003. Nye retlige design: Dansk ret under konkurrence. Jurist- og Økonomiforbundets Forlag. København. Google Scholar öffnen
  133. Jørgensen, Stine 2007. Etniske minoritetskvinders sociale rettigheder: Arbejdsmarked, seksualitet og uddannelse. Jurist- og Økonomiforbundets Forlag. København. Google Scholar öffnen
  134. Jørgensen, Martin Bak 2012. Danish Regulations on Marriage Migration: Policy Understandings of Transnational Marriages. In Charsley, Katharine (ed.) Transnational Marriage: New Perspectives from Europe and Beyond. Google Scholar öffnen
  135. Kamali, Mohammad H. 1991. Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence. Islamic Text Society. Cambridge. Google Scholar öffnen
  136. Kamali, Mohammad H. 2008. Shari’ah Law: An Introduction. Oneworld Publications. Oxford. Google Scholar öffnen
  137. Kaur, Lavleen 2005. Frihetens pris. Hovedoppgave i kriminologi. Universitetet i Oslo. Oslo. Google Scholar öffnen
  138. Kayed, Camilla 1999. Rett, religion og byråkrati. En studie av skilsmisse blant muslimer i Norge. Hovedoppgave i sosialantropologi, Universitetet i Oslo. Google Scholar öffnen
  139. Ketscher, Kirsten 2000 a. “Mod en argumentativ ret.” Jussens venner. Vol. 35 (5 – 6), pp. 272–287. Google Scholar öffnen
  140. Ketscher, Kirsten 2000 b. “Nogle Utviklingslinjer i kvinderetten.” In Numhauser-Henning, Anne (ed.) 2000. Festskrift til Anna Christensen. Juristforlaget, Lund 2000. Google Scholar öffnen
  141. Ketscher, Kirsten 2008. Diskrimineringsforbud – nogle generelle overvejelser. In Hellum and Ketscher (eds.) Diskriminerings- og likestillingsrett. Universitetsforlaget. Oslo. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1055/s-2008-1026380
  142. Ketscher, Kirsten 2014. Socialret: Principper, rettigheder, verdier. Thomson. København. Google Scholar öffnen
  143. Kierulf, Anine 2009. ”Rettsstatens overnasjonale vending: den andre prøvingsretten”. Nytt Norsk Tidsskrift 2009, pp. 256–270. Google Scholar öffnen
  144. Kjønstad, Asbjørn 1984. “Husmorsameiet og rettsutviklingen.” Tidsskrift for rettsvitenskap, 1984, pp. 554–586 Google Scholar öffnen
  145. Kolrud et al. 2007. Voldgiftsloven: Kommentarutgave. Universitetsforlaget. Oslo. Google Scholar öffnen
  146. Korteweg, Anna C. and Jennifer A. Selby (eds.) 2012. Debating Sharia: Islam, Gender Politics and Family Law Arbitration 2012. University of Toronto Press. Toronto, Buffalo, London. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.14796/JWMM.R245-08
  147. Krivenko, Ekaterina Yahyaoui 2009. Women, Islam and International Law within the Context of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against [sic] Women. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. Leiden. Google Scholar öffnen
  148. Kruiniger, P. 2012. Article 16 of the Women’s Convention and the Status of Muslim Women at Divorce. In Westendorp, Ingrid (ed.) The Women’s Convention Turned 30: Achievements, Setbacks and Prospects. Intersentia. Cambridge. Antwerp. Portland. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2066576
  149. Lacey, Nicola 2004. Feminist Legal Theory and the Rights of Women. In Knop, Karen (ed.) Gender and Human Rights. Oxford University Press. Oxford. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199260911.003.0002
  150. Larsen, Lena 2011. Islamsk rettstenkning i møte med dagliglivets utfordringer : fatwaer som løsningsforslag for muslimske kvinner i Vest-Europa. Doctoral dissertation, Det humanistiske fakultet, Universitetet i Oslo. Google Scholar öffnen
  151. Larsson, Göran (ed.) 2009. Islam in the Nordic and Baltic countries. Routledge. London and New York. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.4324/9780203879115
  152. Lau, Martin 2006. The Role of Islam in the Legal System of Pakistan. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. Leiden. Boston. Google Scholar öffnen
  153. Lidén Hilde (2005). Transnasjonale serieekteskap: Art, omfang og kompleksitet. Rapport 2005:11. Institutt for samfunnsforskning. Google Scholar öffnen
  154. Lidén Hilde, Anja Bredal, Liza Reisel (2014). Transnasjonal oppvekst:Om lengre utenlandsopphold blant barn og unge med innvandrerbakgrunn. Rapport (2014:005) Oslo: Institutt for samfunnsforskning Google Scholar öffnen
  155. Liversage, Anika and Tina Gudrun Jensen 2011. Paralelle retsopfattelser i Danmark. Et kvalitativt studie av privatretlige praksissser. Det nationale forskningscenter for velfærd. København. Google Scholar öffnen
  156. Lundgaard, Hans Petter 2000. Gaarders innføring i internasjonal privatrett: ved Hans Petter Lundgaard. Universitetsforlaget. Oslo. Google Scholar öffnen
  157. Lødrup, Peter and Tone Sverdrup 2011. Familieretten. Peter Lødrup and Tone Sverdrup. Oslo. Google Scholar öffnen
  158. Løvdal, L. 2008. “Private International Law, Muslim Laws and Gender Equality.” Kvinnerettslig skriftserie 78:2008. Google Scholar öffnen
  159. MacFarlane, Julie 2012 a. Understanding Trends in American Muslim Divorce and Marriage: A Discussion Guide for Families and Communities. ISPU. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199753918.003.0008
  160. MacFarlane, Julie 2012 b. Islamic divorce in North America : a shari'a path in a secular society. Oxford University Press. Oxford. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199753918.003.0008
  161. Masud, Muhammad Khalid 2012. Interpreting Divorce Laws in Pakistan: Debates on Shari’a and Gender Equality in 2008. In Mehdi, R. et al. (eds.) Interpreting Divorce Laws in Islam. DJØF Publishing. Copenhagen. Google Scholar öffnen
  162. Matheson, William og Geir Woxholth 1990. Lovavdelingens uttalelser 1976–1988 Brev 28.4.1982, saksnummer 1233/82 E FAG/BN tr. Trykket i Juridisk forlag AS. Oslo. Google Scholar öffnen
  163. Meidell, Andreas 1999. “Standardvilkår som uniforme regler for internasjonale kontrakter: En introduksjon.” Jussens venner. Vol. 34, pp. 399–413. Google Scholar öffnen
  164. Meidell, Andreas 2002. “Anasjonal kontraktsrett – «Lex Mercatoria».” In Krüger et al. Nybrott og odling – festskrift til Nils Nygaard på 70-årsdagen 3. april 2002. Fagbokforlaget. Bergen. Google Scholar öffnen
  165. Mehdi, Rubya 2001. Gender and Property Law in Pakistan: Resources and Discourses. DJØF Publishing. København. Google Scholar öffnen
  166. Mehdi, Rubya. 2003. “Danish law and the practice of mahr among Muslim Pakistanis in Denmark.” International Journal of the Sociology and the Law. Vol. 31 (2003) 115–129. Google Scholar öffnen
  167. Mehdi, Rubya 1994. The Islamization of the Laws in Pakistan. Curzen Press, UK. Google Scholar öffnen
  168. Mehdi, Rubya and Jørgen Nielsen (eds.) 2011. Embedding Mahr in the European Legal System. DJØF Publishing, Copenhagen. Google Scholar öffnen
  169. Mehdi, Rubya 2012. Interpreting Women’s Right to Divorce in Present Day Islamic Family Laws: Trans-National and Cross-Cultural Developments in the Law of Divorce. In Mehdi, R. et al. (eds.) 2012. Interpreting Divorce Laws in Islam. DJØF Publishing. Copenhagen. Google Scholar öffnen
  170. Mehdi, R. et al. (eds.) 2012. Interpreting Divorce Laws in Islam. DJØF Publishing. Copenhagen. Google Scholar öffnen
  171. Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary of Law 2011. Merriam-Webster Incorporated. Springfield, Massachusetts. Google Scholar öffnen
  172. Merry, Sally Engle 1988. “Legal Pluralism.” Law and Society Review. Vol. 22 (5), pp. 869–896. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.2307/3053638
  173. Merry, Sally Engle 2013. “McGill Convocation Address: Legal Pluralism in Practice.” McGill Law Journal. Vol. 59, 2013, pp. 1–8. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.7202/1018983ar
  174. Mir-Hosseini, Ziba 1996. The Delegated Right to Divorce: Law and Practice in Morocco and Iran. In Carrol, L and H. Kapoor 1996. Talaq-i-Tafwid. The Muslim Woman’s Contractual Access to Divorce. Women Living under Muslim Laws Readers and Compilation Series. Google Scholar öffnen
  175. Mir-Hosseini, Ziba 2000 a. Islam and Gender: The Religious Debate in Contemporary Iran. I.B. Tauris. London. New York. Google Scholar öffnen
  176. Mir-Hosseini, Ziba 2000 b. Marriage on Trial: A study of Islamic Family Law. I.B. Tauris Publishers. London. New York. Google Scholar öffnen
  177. Mir-Hosseini 2004. A Woman’s Right to Terminate the Marriage Contract. The Case of Iran. In Qureshi, A. (ed.) The Islamic Marriage Contract. Harvard University Press, pp. 1–22. Google Scholar öffnen
  178. Mir-Hosseini, Ziba et al. 2014. Gender and Equality in Muslim Family Law: Justice and Ethics in the Islamic Legal Tradition. I.B.Tauris. London. New York. Google Scholar öffnen
  179. Moore, Sally Falk 2000. Law as Process: An Anthropological Approach (1978). LIT. International African Institute. James Currey. Haburg. Oxford. Google Scholar öffnen
  180. Moore, Kathleen M. 2010. The Unfamiliar Abode: Islamic law in the United States and Britain. Oxford University Press. Oxford. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195387810.003.0001
  181. Moors, A. 2011. Mahr Meanings — Dower Dealings: Reflections from Palestine. In Mehdi R. and J.Nielsen (eds.) Embedding Mahr in the European Legal System. DJØF Publishing, Copenhagen. Google Scholar öffnen
  182. Moss, Giuditta Cordero 1999. International Commercial Arbitration: Party Autonomy and Mandatory Rules. Tano. Aschoug. Oslo. Google Scholar öffnen
  183. Mulla, D.F. 1996. D.F Mulla’s Principles of Mahomedan Law. Pakistan Edition edited by Dr. M.A.Mannan. P.L.D. Publishers. Lahore. Google Scholar öffnen
  184. Mumtaz & Associates 2015. Divorce Laws in Pakistan. http://www.ma-law.org.pk/Divorce_Laws_Divorce_Lawyer_in_Karachi_divorce_Lawyer_in_Lahore_divorce_law_firms_in_Pakistan.html. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.3362/9780855988135.001
  185. Nader, Laura 2002. The Life of the Law: Anthropological Projects. University of California Press. Berkely. Los Angeles. London. Google Scholar öffnen
  186. Nasir, J. J. A. 2009. The Islamic Law of Personal Status. Brill. Leiden. Boston. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004172739.i-227
  187. Nasir, J. J. A. 2009. The Status of Women under Islamic Law and Modern Islamic Legislation. Brill. Leiden. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004172739.i-227
  188. Nesvik, Marie 2014. Forelesningsnotater i internasjonal privatrett: Person-,familie- og arverett (et tillegg til Helge J. Thues bok). Institutt for privatrett. Skriftserie, 195. Google Scholar öffnen
  189. Newcomb, Rachel 2012. Justice for Everyone? Implementation of Morocco’s 2004 Mudawana Reforms. In Mehdi, R. et al. (eds.) 2012. Interpreting Divorce Laws in Islam. DJØF Publishing. Copenhagen. Google Scholar öffnen
  190. Nowak, M. 2005. UN Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: ICCPR Commentary, 2nd Edition, N.P.Engel, Kehl. Google Scholar öffnen
  191. Nyamu, Celestine I. 2000. “How Should Human Rights and Development Respond to Cultural Legitimization of Gender Hierarchy in Developing Countries?” Harvard International Law Journal. Vol. 41 (2), pp. 381–418. Google Scholar öffnen
  192. Olsen, Henrik Palmer 2005. Magtfordeling: En analyse av magtfordelingslæren med særligt henblik på den lovgivende magt. Jurist- og Økonomiforbundets Forlag. København. Google Scholar öffnen
  193. Otto, Jan Michiel (ed.) 2010. Sharia Incorporated: A Comparative Overview of the Legal Systems of Twelve Muslim Countries in Past and Present. Leiden University Press. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.5117/9789087280574
  194. Pearl, David 1987. “South Asian Immigrant Communities and English Family Law 1971–1987.” New Community. Vol. 14 (1–2), pp.161–169. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.1987.9976042
  195. Pearl, D and W. Menski 1998. Muslim Family Law. Third Edition. Sweet and Maxwell. London. Google Scholar öffnen
  196. Pelto Perti J and Gretel H. Pelto 1999. Anthropological Research: The Structure of Inquiry. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, London, New York, Melbourne. Google Scholar öffnen
  197. Poulter, Sebastian M. 1998. Ethnicity, law and Human Rights. Clarendon Press. Oxford Google Scholar öffnen
  198. Raday, F. 2003. “Culture, Religion and Gender.” International Journal of Constitutional Law. Oct, 2003. Vol. 1 (4), pp.663–715 Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1093/icon/1.4.663
  199. Razack, Sherene 2004. “Imperilled Muslim Women, Dangerous Muslim Men and Civilised Europeans: Legal and Social Responses to Forced Marriages.” Feminist Legal Studies Vol. 12, pp. 129–174. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1023/B:FEST.0000043305.66172.92
  200. Razack, S. 2007 a. “The Sharia Law Debate in Ontario, The Modernity/Premodernity Distinction in Legal Efforts to Protect Women from Culture”. Feminist Legal Studies. Vol. 15 (1) pp. 3–32. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1007/s10691-006-9050-x
  201. Razack, Sherene 2007 b. Casting out: the eviction of Muslims from Western law and politics. University of Toronto Press. Toronto, Buffalo, London. Google Scholar öffnen
  202. Red Cross Oslo 2008-2011. Røde Kors-telefonen om tvangsekteskap og kjønnslemlestelse 815 55 201. Rapport om kjønnslemlestelse for perioden 2008-2011. https://www.rodekors.no/Global/DK/DK-Oslo/Dokumenter/120925_%C3%85rsrapport%20om%20kj%C3%B8nnslemlestelse%20for%20perioden%202008%20-%202011%20_web.pdf Google Scholar öffnen
  203. Red Cross Oslo 2012. Røde Kors-telefonen om tvangsekteskap og kjønnslemlestelse 815 55 201. Rapport for 2012. https://www.rodekors.no/Global/DK/DK-Oslo/Dokumenter/130218_RK-telefonen_rapport2012_TRYKKFIL.pdf Google Scholar öffnen
  204. Rehof, Lars A. 1993. Guide to the Travaux Preparatoires of the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. Dordrecht. Boston. London. Google Scholar öffnen
  205. Reinhart, A.K. 1983.” Islamic Law and Islamic Ethics.” The Journal of Religious Ethics. Vol. 11 (2), pp. 186–203. Google Scholar öffnen
  206. Reinharz, Shulamit (1983). Experiential analysis: a contribution to feminist research. In Gloria Bowles & Renate Duelli (eds.) Klein Theories of Women's Studies (pp. 162–192). Routledge and Kegan Paul. London. Google Scholar öffnen
  207. Reinharz, Shulamit (1992). Feminist methods in social research. Oxford University Press. Oxford. Google Scholar öffnen
  208. Roald, Anne Sofie 2001. Women in Islam: The Western Experience. Routledge. London and New York. Google Scholar öffnen
  209. Roald, Anne Sofie 2005. Er muslimske kvinner undertrykt? Pax. Oslo. Google Scholar öffnen
  210. Ross, Alf 1959. Om ret og retfærdighet: en indførelse i den analytiske retsfilosofi. Nyt Nordisk Forlag. København. Google Scholar öffnen
  211. Rutten, Susan (2011). The struggle of Embedding the Islamic Mahr in a Western Legal System. In Mehdi R. and J.Nielsen (eds.) Embedding Mahr in the European Legal System. DJØF Publishing, Copenhagen. Google Scholar öffnen
  212. Sadeleer, Nicolas de (ed.) 2007. Implementing the Precautionary Principle: Approaches from the Nordic Countries, EU and USA. Earthscan. London. Sterling, VA. Google Scholar öffnen
  213. Saif, Mohammed Ali 2003. Information regarding divorce [in Pakistan]. Report given to the Royal Norwegian Embassy Islamabad. 9th september 2003. Unpublished. Google Scholar öffnen
  214. Sandberg, Russel et al. 2012. “Britain’s Religious Tribunals: ‘Joint Governance’ in Practice.” Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, (2012), pp. 1–29. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1093/ojls/gqs031
  215. Sandnes, Torild (2014) Familieinnvandring og ekteskapsmønster 1990–2012.Rapporter 2014/11. Statistisk sentralbyrå. Google Scholar öffnen
  216. Shah, Niaz A. 2006. Women, the Koran and International Human Rights Law: The Experience of Pakistan. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. Leiden, Boston. Google Scholar öffnen
  217. Shah, Prakash 2010. Between God and the Sultana? Legal pluralism in the British Muslim Diaspora. In Nielsen, Jørgen S. and Lisbet Christoffersen (eds.) Shari’a as Discourse: Legal Traditions and the Encounter with Europe. Farnham: Ashgate, pp. 117–139. Google Scholar öffnen
  218. Shaheed, Farida 1997. Interface of Culture, Custom and Law: Implications for Women and Activism. In Mehdi, Rubya and Farida Shaheed (eds.) Women’s Law in Legal Education and Practice in Pakistan: North South Cooperation. New Social Science Monograph. Copenhagen. Google Scholar öffnen
  219. Shaheed, Farida 2010. “Contested Identities: gendered politics, gendered religion in Pakistan.” Third World Quarterly. Vol. 31 (6), pp. 851–867. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2010.502710
  220. Shah-Kazemi, Sonia N. 2001. Untying the Knot: Muslim Women, Divorce and the Shariah. The Nuffield Foundation. London. Google Scholar öffnen
  221. Schiek, Dagmar 2009. From European Union non-discrimination law towards multidimensional equality law for Europe. In Schiek, Dagmar and Victoria Chege (eds.) European Union Non-Discrimination Law: Comparative perspectives on multidimensional equality law. Routledge. Cavendish. London and New York. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.4324/9780203892626
  222. Schmidt, Torben Svenné 1990. International person-, familie-, og arveret. Jurist- og Økonomforbundets Forlag. København. Google Scholar öffnen
  223. Schiratzki, Johanna 2001. Muslimsk familjerett — I svenskt perspektiv. Norstedts Juridik. Stockholm. Google Scholar öffnen
  224. Schostak, John 2006. Interviewing and Representation in Qualitative Research. Open University Press. Birkshire. Google Scholar öffnen
  225. Shue, Henry 1980. Basic rights: subsistence, affluence, and U.S. foreign policy. Princeton University Press. Princeton, N.J. Google Scholar öffnen
  226. Siddiqui, Haroon 2006. Being Muslim: A Groundwork Guide. Groundwood Books. House of Anasi Press. Toronto. Berkely. Google Scholar öffnen
  227. Sjåfjell, Beate 2009. Towards a Sustainable EU Company Law: A Normative Analysis of the Objectives of EU Law, with the Takeover Directive as a Test Case. Kluwer Law International. Alphen aan den Rijn. Google Scholar öffnen
  228. Skarning, Nicolay 2001. Kontraktsrett i Norge, Skottland og England: en praktisk håndbok. Juristforbundets Forlag. Oslo. Google Scholar öffnen
  229. Stojanovic, Srdjan 1983. Die Parteiautonomie und der international Entscheidungseinklang unter besonderer Berücksichtigung des Internationalen Ehegüterrechts. Zurich. Google Scholar öffnen
  230. Statistics Norway 2014. Population statistics 2014, Statistics Bank, accessed 27th May 2014: Table 01451: Population by immigrant category, country background, sex, age and marital status. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1007/BF02972661
  231. Statistics Norway (2013), Registerbased employment statistics. 2012, 4th. quarter. Statistics Norway. Google Scholar öffnen
  232. Stanley, Liz & Sue Wise 1990. Method, methodology and epistemology in feminist research processes. In Stanley, Liz (ed.) Feminist praxis (pp.20–60). London: Routledge. Google Scholar öffnen
  233. Stanley, Liz & Sue Wise 1993. Breaking out again. London: Routledge. Google Scholar öffnen
  234. Steiner, Henry J. et al. 2008. International Human Rights in Context: Law, Politics, Morals. Text and Materials. Oxford University Press. Oxford. Google Scholar öffnen
  235. Strand, Vibeke Blaker 2011. Diskrimineringsvernets rekkevidde i møte med religionsutøvelse. Doktoravhandling forsvart ved Det juridiske fakultet, Universitetet i Oslo. Nr. 46. Google Scholar öffnen
  236. Strand, Vibeke Blaker 2012. Diskrimineringsvern og religionsutøvelse: Hvor langt rekker individvernet? Gyldendal Juridisk. Oslo. Google Scholar öffnen
  237. Strand, Vibeke Blaker 2015. «Ikke kun en Grunnlov på papiret – Barns menneskerettigheter er styrket». Morgenbladet, 20 February,2015. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198722731.003.0012
  238. Storhaug, Hege 2003. Feminin integrering: Utfordringer i et fleretnisk samfunn. Kolofon forlag. Oslo. Google Scholar öffnen
  239. Sverdrup, Tone 1997. Stiftelse av sameie i ekteskap og ugift samliv. Universitetsforlaget. Oslo. Google Scholar öffnen
  240. Taj, Farhat 2013. Legal Pluralism, Human rights and Islam in Norway: Making Norwegian Law Available, Acceptable and Accessible to Women in a Multicultural Setting. Series of dissertations submitted to the Faculty of Law, University of Oslo No. 58. Faculty of Law, University of Oslo. 2013 Google Scholar öffnen
  241. Tamahana, Brian Z. 2001. A General Jurisprudence of Law and Society. Oxford Univeristy Press. Oxford Google Scholar öffnen
  242. The Muslim Institute 2008. Muslim Marriage Contract. http://muslimmarriagecontract.org/MuslimMarriageContract.html. Google Scholar öffnen
  243. Thorbjørnsrud (2003). Det muliges kunst: En utredning om mulige tiltak for å sikre alle «like, religiøse som lovmessige retter til skilsmisse». Rapport. Institutt for kulturstudier Universitetet i Oslo [n.d.]. https://www.regjeringen.no/globalassets/upload/aid/publikasjoner/horing/2003/vilkar_familiegjenforening/thorbjornsrud_kulturstudier.pdf?id=2237427. Google Scholar öffnen
  244. Thue, Helge J. 1997. “Formuesordningen i internasjonale ekteskap”. Lov og rett, 1997, pp. 34–54. Google Scholar öffnen
  245. Thue, Helge Johan 2002. Internasjonal privatrett: personrett, familierett og arverett. Gyldendal akademisk. Oslo. Google Scholar öffnen
  246. Thue, Helge Johan 1983. Samliv og sameie: Husarbeid og sammenblandet økonomi som grunnlag for sameie mellom ektefeller og mellom parter i avtalt samliv. Tanum-Norli. Oslo. Google Scholar öffnen
  247. Tronstad, Kristian 2007. Fordelingen av økonomiske ressurser mellom kvinner og menn. Rapporter 1/2007 Statistisk sentralbyrå. Google Scholar öffnen
  248. Tronstad, Kristian Rose (2008) “Religion. Chapter 8”. In Levekår blant innvandrere Google Scholar öffnen
  249. i Norge 2005/2006. Rapporter 2008/5. Statistisk sentralbyrå (SSB) Google Scholar öffnen
  250. Trouwborst, A. 2006. Precautionary Rights and Duties of States. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.Leiden. Boston. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004152120.i-352
  251. Ruud, Morten and Geir Ulfstein 2006. Innføring i folkerett. Universitetsforlaget. Oslo. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1093/law:epil/9780199231690/e165
  252. Ulfstein, Geir 2009. “Menneskerettslige overvåkningsorganer: betydningen i folkeretten og norsk rett.” In Aune et al. (eds.) Arbeid og rett: Festskrift til Henning Jakhellns 70 års dag. Cappelen akademisk forlag. Oslo. Google Scholar öffnen
  253. Ulfstein, Geir 2012. “Den rettslige betydningen av avgjørelser fra menneskerettslige konvensjonsorganer. ” Lov og Rett. Vol. 51 (9), pp. 552–570. Google Scholar öffnen
  254. Vanderlinden, Jacques 1989. “Return to Legal Pluralism: Twenty Years Later.” Journal of Legal Pluralism. Vol. 28. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/07329113.1989.10756411
  255. Voigt, Christina 2009. Sustainable Development as a Principle of International Law: Resolving Conflicts between Climate Measures and WTO Law. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. Leiden. Google Scholar öffnen
  256. Warraich, Sohail Akbar and Cassandra Balchin 2006. Recognizing the Unrecognized: Inter-Country Cases and Muslim Marriages & Divorces in Britain. A Policy Research by Women Living Under Muslim Laws. WLUML Publications. Google Scholar öffnen
  257. Welchman, Lynn 2007. Women and Muslim Family Laws in Arab States: A Comparative Overview of Textual Development and Advocacy. Amsterdam University Press. Amsterdam. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.5117/9789053569740
  258. Wente, Margaret 2004. “Life under Sharia, in Canada?” Globe and Mail, 29 May 2004. Google Scholar öffnen
  259. WLUML, 2006. Knowing our Rights. Women, family, laws and customs in the Muslim world. WLUML. London Google Scholar öffnen
  260. Woodman, Gordon R. 1999. The Idea of Legal Pluralism. In Baudouin et al. (eds.) Legal Pluralism in the Arab World. Kluwer Law International. The Hague. Google Scholar öffnen
  261. Woxholth, Geir 2013. Voldgift. Gyldendal Juridisk. Oslo. Google Scholar öffnen
  262. Wray, Helena 2012. Any Time, Any Place, Anywhere: Entry Clearance, Marriage Migration and the Border. In Charsley, Katharine (ed.) Transnational Marriage: New Perspectives from Europe and Beyond. Routledge. New York. London. Google Scholar öffnen
  263. Wærstad, Tone Linn (2006). Retten til ikke å bli diskriminert ved skilsmisse. En rettsantropologisk studie av skilte muslimske innvandrerkvinner i Norge. Kvinnerettslig skriftserie 64. Universitetet i Oslo. Google Scholar öffnen
  264. Wærstad, Tone Linn (2014). Hvordan bør voldgift basert på religiøs rett behandles i norsk rett? Lærdommer fra Canada sett i lys av diskrimineringsvernet. In Hellum, Anne and Julia Köhler-Olsen (eds.): Like rettigheter – ulike liv: Rettslig kompleksitet i kvinne- barne- og innvandrerperspektiv. Gyldendal Juridisk. Oslo. Google Scholar öffnen
  265. Wærstad (2016): Harmonising Human Rights Law and Private International Law through the Ordre Public Reservation: the example of the Norwegian Regulation of the Recognition of Foreign Divorces. Oslo Law Review, 2016, Issue 1, 51-71. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.5617/oslaw3947
  266. Yilmaz, I. 2001. “Law as Chameleon: The Question of Incorporation of Muslim Personal Law into English Law.” Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs. Vol. 21 (2), pp. 297–308. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/1360200120092879
  267. Zahraa, Mahdi and Nora A. Hak 2006. Tahkim (Arbitration) in Islamic Law within the Context of Family Disputes. 20 Arab Law Quarterly. Vol. (20), pp. 2–42. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1163/026805506777525447
  268. Zee, Machtel 2013 a. “What happens at Sharia councils? Part Two: The most liberal one.” Leiden Law Blog at http://leidenlawblog.nl/articles/what-happens-at-sharia-councils-part-two-the-most-liberal-one. Google Scholar öffnen
  269. Zee, Machtel 2013 b. “The legal status and future of Sharia councils.” Leiden Law Blog at http://leidenlawblog.nl/articles/the-legal-status-and-future-of-sharia-councils. Google Scholar öffnen

Ähnliche Veröffentlichungen

aus dem Schwerpunkt "Europarecht & Internationales Recht & Rechtsvergleichung"
Cover des Buchs: Unbeabsichtigte Normenkonflikte zwischen EU-Recht und nationalem Recht
Monographie Kein Zugriff
Yannis Ockernahl
Unbeabsichtigte Normenkonflikte zwischen EU-Recht und nationalem Recht
Cover des Buchs: Der Volkseinwand
Monographie Kein Zugriff
Florian Feigl
Der Volkseinwand
Cover des Buchs: Wie fördert die EU Menschenrechte in Drittstaaten?
Monographie Kein Zugriff
Dennis Traudt
Wie fördert die EU Menschenrechte in Drittstaaten?
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: Das Weltraumrecht und seine Eignung für den Rohstoffabbau durch Privatakteure
Monographie Kein Zugriff
Justus Schmidt
Das Weltraumrecht und seine Eignung für den Rohstoffabbau durch Privatakteure

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