Publikation:

The Concept of 'Principled Resistance' to ECtHR Judgments : A Useful Tool to Analyse Implementation Deficits?

Lade...
Vorschaubild

Dateien

Breuer_2-1nqggycd99wav9.pdf
Breuer_2-1nqggycd99wav9.pdfGröße: 178.09 KBDownloads: 76

Datum

2021

Autor:innen

Herausgeber:innen

Kontakt

ISSN der Zeitschrift

Electronic ISSN

ISBN

Bibliografische Daten

Verlag

Schriftenreihe

Auflagebezeichnung

ArXiv-ID

Internationale Patentnummer

Angaben zur Forschungsförderung

Projekt

Open Access-Veröffentlichung
Open Access Green
Core Facility der Universität Konstanz

Gesperrt bis

Titel in einer weiteren Sprache

Publikationstyp
Zeitschriftenartikel
Publikationsstatus
Published

Erschienen in

Journal of International Dispute Settlement. Oxford University Press (OUP). 2021, 12(2), pp. 250-270. ISSN 2040-3585. eISSN 2040-3593. Available under: doi: 10.1093/jnlids/idaa028

Zusammenfassung

Recent years have seen a marked increase in ‘clashes’ between national courts on the one hand and international courts and tribunals on the other hand. This article introduces a new analytical pattern, called ‘principled resistance’, in order to analyse deficits occurring during the implementation phase of a Strasbourg judgment. This analytical concept is contrasted with other most recently developed scholarly concepts (‘reasonable resistance’: Palombino; ‘pushback’ and ‘backlash’: Madsen; ‘principled’ and ‘dilatory non-execution’: de Londras and Dzehtsiarou) in order to show differences and commonalities. Furthermore, the limits of (permissible) ‘disagreement’, as opposed to (impermissible) ‘principled resistance’, are explored from an international law point of view. It will be argued that although cases of principled resistance are extremely rare, the concept has an analytical value in that it prevents us from overestimating divergences between national and international courts and tribunals. At the same time, it will be shown that even where courts and other national actors employ legal arguments for their resistance to the ECtHR, those conflicts should be conceptualized as struggles over the proper allocation of powers between the national level and Strasbourg.

Zusammenfassung in einer weiteren Sprache

Fachgebiet (DDC)
340 Recht

Schlagwörter

Konferenz

Rezension
undefined / . - undefined, undefined

Forschungsvorhaben

Organisationseinheiten

Zeitschriftenheft

Zugehörige Datensätze in KOPS

Zitieren

ISO 690BREUER, Marten, 2021. The Concept of 'Principled Resistance' to ECtHR Judgments : A Useful Tool to Analyse Implementation Deficits?. In: Journal of International Dispute Settlement. Oxford University Press (OUP). 2021, 12(2), pp. 250-270. ISSN 2040-3585. eISSN 2040-3593. Available under: doi: 10.1093/jnlids/idaa028
BibTex
@article{Breuer2021Conce-53634,
  year={2021},
  doi={10.1093/jnlids/idaa028},
  title={The Concept of 'Principled Resistance' to ECtHR Judgments : A Useful Tool to Analyse Implementation Deficits?},
  number={2},
  volume={12},
  issn={2040-3585},
  journal={Journal of International Dispute Settlement},
  pages={250--270},
  author={Breuer, Marten}
}
RDF
<rdf:RDF
    xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
    xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
    xmlns:bibo="http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/"
    xmlns:dspace="http://digital-repositories.org/ontologies/dspace/0.1.0#"
    xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"
    xmlns:void="http://rdfs.org/ns/void#"
    xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#" > 
  <rdf:Description rdf:about="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/53634">
    <foaf:homepage rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/"/>
    <dspace:hasBitstream rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/53634/1/Breuer_2-1nqggycd99wav9.pdf"/>
    <dc:date rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2021-05-10T12:03:50Z</dc:date>
    <dc:contributor>Breuer, Marten</dc:contributor>
    <dcterms:issued>2021</dcterms:issued>
    <dspace:isPartOfCollection rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/44"/>
    <dcterms:isPartOf rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/44"/>
    <dc:rights>terms-of-use</dc:rights>
    <dcterms:available rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2021-05-10T12:03:50Z</dcterms:available>
    <dc:creator>Breuer, Marten</dc:creator>
    <dcterms:hasPart rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/53634/1/Breuer_2-1nqggycd99wav9.pdf"/>
    <dcterms:rights rdf:resource="https://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/"/>
    <bibo:uri rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/53634"/>
    <void:sparqlEndpoint rdf:resource="http://localhost/fuseki/dspace/sparql"/>
    <dcterms:abstract xml:lang="eng">Recent years have seen a marked increase in ‘clashes’ between national courts on the one hand and international courts and tribunals on the other hand. This article introduces a new analytical pattern, called ‘principled resistance’, in order to analyse deficits occurring during the implementation phase of a Strasbourg judgment. This analytical concept is contrasted with other most recently developed scholarly concepts (‘reasonable resistance’: Palombino; ‘pushback’ and ‘backlash’: Madsen; ‘principled’ and ‘dilatory non-execution’: de Londras and Dzehtsiarou) in order to show differences and commonalities. Furthermore, the limits of (permissible) ‘disagreement’, as opposed to (impermissible) ‘principled resistance’, are explored from an international law point of view. It will be argued that although cases of principled resistance are extremely rare, the concept has an analytical value in that it prevents us from overestimating divergences between national and international courts and tribunals. At the same time, it will be shown that even where courts and other national actors employ legal arguments for their resistance to the ECtHR, those conflicts should be conceptualized as struggles over the proper allocation of powers between the national level and Strasbourg.</dcterms:abstract>
    <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
    <dcterms:title>The Concept of 'Principled Resistance' to ECtHR Judgments : A Useful Tool to Analyse Implementation Deficits?</dcterms:title>
  </rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>

Interner Vermerk

xmlui.Submission.submit.DescribeStep.inputForms.label.kops_note_fromSubmitter

Kontakt
URL der Originalveröffentl.

Prüfdatum der URL

Prüfungsdatum der Dissertation

Finanzierungsart

Kommentar zur Publikation

Allianzlizenz
Corresponding Authors der Uni Konstanz vorhanden
Internationale Co-Autor:innen
Universitätsbibliographie
Ja
Begutachtet
Unbekannt
Diese Publikation teilen