SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
 número27Amparo federal vs. amparo local: La incertidumbre de la protección constitucional local frente a la jurisdicción federalSistema parlamentario y régimen electoral en España: similitudes y diferencias entre la forma de gobierno en el Estado y las comunidades autónomas índice de autoresíndice de materiabúsqueda de artículos
Home Pagelista alfabética de revistas  

Servicios Personalizados

Revista

Articulo

Indicadores

Links relacionados

  • No hay artículos similaresSimilares en SciELO

Compartir


Cuestiones constitucionales

versión impresa ISSN 1405-9193

Resumen

CARDENES, Agustín Alejandro. Judicial review in France: restlessness on top or constructive exchange of arguments?. Cuest. Const. [online]. 2012, n.27, pp.41-71. ISSN 1405-9193.

Recent introduction of judicial review in France gave rise to two unexpected consequences. First, judicial review procedure details, added by parliament, somehow transformed and radicalized the main reform. Second, and as a consequence of the former, hostile attitude towards judicial review from one of France's supreme jurisdictions (Cassation Court) started an unprecedented dialogue between jurisdictions, dialogue which involved almost all european and french supreme jurisdictions, apart from European Court of Human Rights. This inter-jurisdictional dialogue might be an anticipation of a new modus operandi of european jurisdictions (national and regional), which could use this dialogue or argument exchange as a mean to avoid complex challenges presented by growing interaction between multi-level jurisdictions and rules. The aim of this article is to describe and analyze these two consequences.

Palabras llave : a posteriori judicial review - France-; argument exchange.

        · resumen en Español     · texto en Español     · Español ( pdf )

 

Creative Commons License Todo el contenido de esta revista, excepto dónde está identificado, está bajo una Licencia Creative Commons