The paper aims at addressing the method of comparative legal reasoning concerning fundamental rights. The paper's central claim is that comparative legal reasoning should not assume the likeness of reasonableness scrutiny, even within the Western Legal Tradition. On the contrary, differences should be underlined in order to compare arguments. The Author's proposal consists in distinguishing within the so called reasonableness scrutiny two phases, with a view to perform a correct comparison of legal argumentations. The first phase is the identification of the purpose of the law, while the second one consists in the means/ends test, which aims at challenging external and internal congruence of the law.
La comparazione degli argomenti in tema di diritti: le trasformazioni del giudizio di ragionevolezza
ROMEO, GRAZIELLA
2017
Abstract
The paper aims at addressing the method of comparative legal reasoning concerning fundamental rights. The paper's central claim is that comparative legal reasoning should not assume the likeness of reasonableness scrutiny, even within the Western Legal Tradition. On the contrary, differences should be underlined in order to compare arguments. The Author's proposal consists in distinguishing within the so called reasonableness scrutiny two phases, with a view to perform a correct comparison of legal argumentations. The first phase is the identification of the purpose of the law, while the second one consists in the means/ends test, which aims at challenging external and internal congruence of the law.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
04_romeo (1).pdf
non disponibili
Tipologia:
Pdf editoriale (Publisher's layout)
Licenza:
NON PUBBLICO - Accesso privato/ristretto
Dimensione
160.71 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
160.71 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.