Read more
This pioneering study on environmental case-law examines how courts engage with science and reviews legitimate styles of judicial reasoning.
List of contents
Part I. The Three-Fold Challenge of Engaging with Science in International Environmental Adjudication: 1. Introduction to a comparative study on judicial engagement with science; 2. The rules of judicial engagement with science: a three-fold challenge; Part II. Techniques for Judicial Engagement with Science in the Practice of International Courts and Tribunals: 3. Judicial engagement with science in the environmental case-law of the international court of justice; 4. Science in the practice of inter-state arbitral tribunals; 5. Science in the environmental jurisprudence of regional human rights courts; 6. Scientific claims before the WTO; 7. Science in the practice of investment arbitral tribunals; 8. Science appears before the international tribunal for the law of the sea; Part III. Engaging with Scientific Knowledge in the Judicial Reasoning: 9. Trends in judicial engagement with science: a comparative assessment; 10. Science and the legitimacy of judicial reasoning; 11. Conclusion; Bibliography; Index.
About the author
Katalin Sulyok is Lecturer, Department of International Law, ELTE Law School, Budapest.
Summary
Examining how judges evaluate scientific knowledge when framing disputes, hearing evidence, conducting causal inquiry, and setting the standard of review, Sulyok provides a comparative analysis of environmental case-law across major international courts. This work also suggests reasoning styles with which judges can legitimately justify decisions.
Additional text
'This is an impressive book which addresses the important and timely topic of how scientific knowledge should be integrated in judicial reasoning. Although the work is focused specifically on international environmental law and adjudication, its theoretical depth and vast analysis of scholarship and practice make it an indispensable tool for any area of international law where judicial decision is confronted with the problem of reconciling 'scientific truth' with the normative imperative of administering justice.' Francesco Francioni, Professor and Chair of International Law, European University Institute, Florence
