Read more
International courts use two key methodologies to determine the degree of deference granted to states in their implementation of international obligations: the standard of review and margin of appreciation. This book investigates how these doctrines are applied in international courts, analysing where their approaches converge and diverge.
List of contents
- 1: Lukasz Gruszczynski and Wouter Werner: Introduction
- Part I: General issues/comparative perspectives
- 2: Ernst-Ulrich Petersmann: Judicial standards of review and administration of justice in trade and investment law and adjudication
- 3: Ilona Cheyne: Deference and the use of the public policy exception in international courts
- 4: Benedikt Pirker: Democracy and distrust in international law: The procedural democracy doctrine and the standard of review used by international courts and tribunals
- 5: Andrei Mamolea: Good faith review
- Part II: International investment law and WTO law
- 6: Michael Ioannidis: Beyond the standard of review: Deference criteria in WTO law and the case for procedural approach
- 7: Caroline Henckels: The role of the standard of review and the importance of deference in investor-state arbitration
- 8: Erlend Leonhardsen: Treaty change, arbitral practice and the search for a balance: Standards of review and the margin of appreciation in international investment law
- 9: Valentina Vadi and Lukasz Gruszczynski: Standard of review and scientific evidence in WTO law and international investment arbitration: Converging parallels?
- Part III: European Union law
- 10: Pieter Van Cleynenbreugel: National procedural choices before the Court of Justice of the European Union
- 11: Patrycja Dabrowska-Klosinska: Risk, precaution and scientific complexity before the Court of Justice of the European Union
- 12: Alexia Herwig and Asja Serdarevic: Standard of review for necessity and proportionality analysis in EU and WTO law: Why differences in standards of review are legitimate?
- Part IV: International human rights law
- 13: Mónika Ambrus: 1. The European Court of Human Rights and standards of proof: An evidential approach toward the margin of appreciation
- 14: Uladzislau Belavusau: Experts in hate speech cases: Towards a higher standard of proof in Strasbourg?
- 15: Veronika Bílková: The standard of equivalent protection as a standard of review
- 16: Bernard Duhaime: Subsidiarity in the Americas: what room is there for deference in the Inter-American System?
- Part V: Other international courts
- 17: Chiara Ragni: Standard of review and the margin of appreciation before the International Court of Justice
- 18: Rosemary Rayfuse: Standard of review and the International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea
- 19: Karolina Wierczynska: Deference in the International Criminal Court practice concerning admissibility challenges lodged by States
- 20: Diane Bernard: Beyond hierarchy: Standards of review and complementarity of the International Criminal Court
About the author
Lukasz Gruszczynski is Assistant Professor of International Law at the Institute of Law Studies of the Polish Academy of Sciences. He is the author of
Regulating Health and Environmental Risks Under WTO Law (OUP, 2010).
Wouter Werner is Professor of Public International Law at the Free University of Amsterdam. He is a member of the Dutch Advisory Council on Public International Law, and is an editor of the
Leiden Journal of International Law and the
Netherlands Yearbook of International Law.
Summary
International courts use two key methodologies to determine the degree of deference granted to states in their implementation of international obligations: the standard of review and margin of appreciation. This book investigates how these doctrines are applied in international courts, analysing where their approaches converge and diverge.
Additional text
This book... has a comprehensive scope and, to a great extent, offers a good overview of the varying jurisprudence regarding the degree of scrutiny applied by international courts when reviewing States actions... Indeed, this excellent book provides insightful perspectives on how different international courts proceed to exercise their adjudicating power using standard of review and/or margin of appreciation as instruments for either judicial self-restraint or judicial activism... the book does an excellent job in showing the diversity of approaches adopted by different international courts.
