• The concept of proportionality in public law
  • 點閱:23
  • 作者: CHUNG Wai Man, Franco
  • 出版社:City University of Hong Kong
  • 出版年:2020
  • ISBN:9789629373788
  • 格式:PDF,JPG
  • 附註:Includes index
租期14天 今日租書可閱讀至2021-11-07

Proportionality is a German, and thus continental European, concept in public law that is applied by both the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). The principle specifies that measures adopted by executive authorities should not exceed the limits of what is appropriate and necessary in order to achieve legitimate objectives in the interest of the public. Using a functional comparative approach, this book evaluates the extent to which proportionality has been integrated into the English and Hong Kong judicial systems by comparing case law in these courts with that of the CJEU and the ECtHR. The text also reviews the development of proportionality and presents a topical understanding of why its adoption and application have encountered difficulties, particularly regarding socio-economic rights, in some jurisdictions, such as the United Kingdom and Hong Kong. Written by a scholar with experience from both within the Hong Kong judicial system and from international research, this book is the first all-encompassing reference for legal practitioners worldwide.

CHUNG Wai Man, Franco has been a lecturer at various tertiary institutions, including the Chinese University of Hong Kong and City University of Hong Kong, as well as a dissertation supervisor in a Master of Laws (LLM) programme (International and Commercial Law) that is jointly run by the University of Greenwich, United Kingdom and the Hong Kong Management Association. He holds his Doctor of Juridical Science and also worked in multiple arms of the government, under both colonial rule (in 1996) and after the establishment of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (from 1997 until 2009).

  • Preface and Acknowledgements(第xvii頁)
  • List of Abbreviations(第xix頁)
  • List of Cases(第xxi頁)
  • List of Legislation(第li頁)
  • Introduction(第1頁)
  • Chapter 1 From a ‘Culture of Authorisation’ to a ‘Culture of Justification’(第13頁)
    • 1.1 Introduction(第13頁)
    • 1.2 The Rise of the Administrative State(第15頁)
    • 1.3 The Emergence of Civil Society(第21頁)
    • 1.4 The Notion of Good Governance(第22頁)
    • 1.5 Administrative Discretion(第26頁)
    • 1.6 Reasoned Exercise of Discretionary Power(第29頁)
    • 1.7 Personal Prejudices Affect Human Behaviour(第32頁)
    • 1.8 Majority Interests vs Minority Interests in a Democracy(第34頁)
    • 1.9 Parliamentary Sovereignty or Supremacy in the UK(第36頁)
    • 1.10 The Need to Control Administrative Discretion(第44頁)
    • 1.11 The Red Light (or Conservative Normativist) Theory(第46頁)
    • 1.12 ‘Fused’ and ‘Quasi - Fused’ Governments(第48頁)
    • 1.13 A Compensatory Role for the Judiciary to CorrectLegislative Oversight(第51頁)
    • 1.14 Concluding Remarks(第56頁)
  • Chapter 2 Proportionality and Margin of Appreciation(第59頁)
    • 2.1 Introduction(第59頁)
    • 2.2 The Concept of Proportionality(第60頁)
    • 2.3 Margin of Appreciation(第90頁)
    • 2.4 Margin of Appreciation vs Deference(第100頁)
    • 2.5 Similar Approaches in Hong Kong Courts(第107頁)
    • 2.6 Constitutional Legitimacy of Judicial Deference(第110頁)
    • 2.7 Concluding Remarks(第113頁)
  • Chapter 3 Wednesbury Unreasonableness vs Proportionality : A Common Law Debate(第115頁)
    • 3.1 Introduction(第115頁)
    • 3.2 Wednesbury Unreasonableness(第116頁)
    • 3.3 Rationale behind the Wednesbury Formula(第122頁)
    • 3.4 From Wednesbury Unreasonableness to GCHQ Irrationality(第126頁)
    • 3.5 Anxious or Heightened Scrutiny Test or Sliding Scaleof Intensity Test(第133頁)
    • 3.6 Principle of Legality with the Use of Proportionality forProtecting Human Rights Prior to the Human Rights Act 1998(第138頁)
    • 3.7 An Attempt to Recognise Proportionality in the Early 1990s(第140頁)
    • 3.8 British Influence in Hong Kong(第142頁)
    • 3.9 Criticisms of Wednesbury Unreasonableness andIrrationality(第146頁)
    • 3.10 The Principle of Proportionality(第158頁)
    • 3.11 Opposition to Proportionality(第170頁)
    • 3.12 Political, Economic, and Social Policy, and Socio - Economic Rights(第181頁)
    • 3.13 Concluding Remarks(第188頁)
  • Chapter 4 Civil and Political Rights vs Socio - Economic Rights : An Outdated Bifurcation(第191頁)
    • 4.1 Introduction(第191頁)
    • 4.2 Civil and Political Rights vs Socio - Economic Rights(第192頁)
    • 4.3 The Negative - and - Positive Rights Argument(第194頁)
    • 4.4 Philosophical Basis and Evolution of Socio - EconomicRights Adjudication(第197頁)
    • 4.5 Socio - Economic Rights Are No Longer Non - Justiciable(第198頁)
    • 4.6 A New Classification Adopted by the United Nations(第204頁)
    • 4.7 The ‘Incompatibility with Appeal - and - Review Distinction’Argument(第208頁)
    • 4.8 The ‘Incompatibility with the Separation of Powers’or ‘Constitutional and Institutional Incompetence’ Arguments(第217頁)
    • 4.9 Positive Duties Implicit in Civil and Political Rights(第245頁)
    • 4.10 Concluding Remarks(第247頁)
  • Chapter 5 Application of Proportionality in the European Union(第251頁)
    • 5.1 Introduction(第251頁)
    • 5.2 Proportionality in the European Union(第253頁)
    • 5.3 Socio - Economic Rights as Developed by the Courtof Justice of the European Union(第291頁)
    • 5.4 Concluding Remarks(第296頁)
  • Chapter 6 Application of Proportionality in the European Convention on Human Rights(第299頁)
    • 6.1 Introduction(第299頁)
    • 6.2 Proportionality in the European Conventionon Human Rights(第300頁)
    • 6.3 The Theoretical Basis of Positive Rights or Obligationsin the European Convention on Human Rights(第312頁)
    • 6.4 The Relationship between Positive and Negative Rightsor Obligations(第316頁)
    • 6.5 Jurisprudence of Positive Rights or Obligationsby the European Court of Human Rights(第317頁)
    • 6.6 The Scope of Positive Rights or Obligationsunder the European Convention on Human Rights(第319頁)
    • 6.7 Concluding Remarks(第335頁)
  • Chapter 7 Integration of Proportionality in Britain(第337頁)
    • 7.1 Introduction(第337頁)
    • 7.2. European Union Proportionality : Its Integrationinto the United Kingdom(第338頁)
    • 7.3 The Human Rights Act 1998 : Domestic ‘Observance’ or ‘Effect’ of the European Convention on Human Rights(第358頁)
    • 7.4 European Jurisprudence regarding some Civil and Political Rights and its Influence to Impose Positive Obligationsin Socio - Economic Rights Disputes(第395頁)
    • 7.5 Concluding Remarks(第415頁)
  • Chapter 8 Integration of Proportionality in Hong Kong(第417頁)
    • 8.1. Introduction(第417頁)
    • 8.2 Proportionality : Its Integration in Hong Kong under the Billof Rights Ordinance between 1991 and 1997(第418頁)
    • 8.3 The Status of the Bill of Rights Ordinance : A Constitutional Document before and after 1997 ?(第428頁)
    • 8.4 Continued Integration of the Proportionality Principle in Hong Kong under the Basic Law after 1997(第432頁)
    • 8.5 Contributions from Overseas Judges and Referencesto Other Common Law Jurisdictions(第434頁)
    • 8.6 Substantial Overlap of Fundamental Rights in the Billof Rights Ordinance and the Basic Law(第437頁)
    • 8.7 Proportionality Methods Adopted in Constitutional Reviews and Human Rights Adjudications under Article 39of the Basic Law(第438頁)
    • 8.8 Restrictions on Fundamental Rights : Has a Fair Balance Been Struck ?(第452頁)
    • 8.9 Poverty, Social Welfare, and the Enforcement of Socio - Economic Rights in Hong Kong(第494頁)
    • 8.10 Legal Mobilisation : Shifting ‘Political Opportunities’ from the Legislature to the Judiciary(第502頁)
    • 8.11 Judicial Attitudes towards Legal Disputes concerning Policy Formulation and Implementation, and Socio - Economic Rights in Hong Kong(第521頁)
    • 8.12 Non - European Union Laws and Non - Human Rights Laws Can Be Easily Framed within European Union Law, Human Rights Law, and Basic Law Dimensions(第548頁)
    • 8.13 Concluding Remarks(第554頁)
  • Conclusion(第557頁)
  • Bibliography(第575頁)
  • Index(第623頁)
紙本書 NT$ 1596
NT$ 1117

點數租閱 20點
還沒安裝 HyRead 3 嗎?馬上免費安裝~
QR Code