All

What are you looking for?

All
Projects
Results
Organizations

Quick search

  • Projects supported by TA ČR
  • Excellent projects
  • Projects with the highest public support
  • Current projects

Smart search

  • That is how I find a specific +word
  • That is how I leave the -word out of the results
  • “That is how I can find the whole phrase”

The Dynamics of Proportionality: Constitutional Courts and the Review of COVID-19 Regulations

The result's identifiers

  • Result code in IS VaVaI

    <a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00216224%3A14220%2F24%3A00139889" target="_blank" >RIV/00216224:14220/24:00139889 - isvavai.cz</a>

  • Result on the web

    <a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/german-law-journal/article/dynamics-of-proportionality-constitutional-courts-and-the-review-of-covid19-regulations/6F519F4528D94BD4A9CAACBE83A8678B" target="_blank" >https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/german-law-journal/article/dynamics-of-proportionality-constitutional-courts-and-the-review-of-covid19-regulations/6F519F4528D94BD4A9CAACBE83A8678B</a>

  • DOI - Digital Object Identifier

    <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/glj.2023.96" target="_blank" >10.1017/glj.2023.96</a>

Alternative languages

  • Result language

    angličtina

  • Original language name

    The Dynamics of Proportionality: Constitutional Courts and the Review of COVID-19 Regulations

  • Original language description

    The COVID-19 pandemic has made it clear that even when using trusted legal tools, courts may run into challenging problems. Governments reacted to an unprecedented (at least in the context of post-WW2 era of fundamental rights) global crisis by adopting measures that drastically limited fundamental rights in order to protect the lives and health of many. Courts, of course, were entrusted with protecting fundamental rights against governmental overreach. The question was, how strict should the courts be when reviewing governmental acts. On the one hand, they could have relied on substantive proportionality assessment. This option, however was virtually ignored and most courts have opted for a deferential approach. This article analyzes both of these approaches, their strengths and weaknesses, but ultimately it argues that a third option - semiprocedural review - is the best way out of this judicial conundrum. Relying on comparative as well as theoretical arguments, it argues that semiprocedural review is the best way to deal with challenging empirical question - even under conditions of epistemological uncertainty.

  • Czech name

  • Czech description

Classification

  • Type

    J<sub>imp</sub> - Article in a specialist periodical, which is included in the Web of Science database

  • CEP classification

  • OECD FORD branch

    50501 - Law

Result continuities

  • Project

    <a href="/en/project/VI04000096" target="_blank" >VI04000096: Freedom of Movement Restrictions: Technological Opportunities and Constitutional Limits</a><br>

  • Continuities

    P - Projekt vyzkumu a vyvoje financovany z verejnych zdroju (s odkazem do CEP)

Others

  • Publication year

    2024

  • Confidentiality

    S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Data specific for result type

  • Name of the periodical

    German Law Journal

  • ISSN

    2071-8322

  • e-ISSN

  • Volume of the periodical

    25

  • Issue of the periodical within the volume

    3

  • Country of publishing house

    GB - UNITED KINGDOM

  • Number of pages

    21

  • Pages from-to

    386-406

  • UT code for WoS article

    001163104300001

  • EID of the result in the Scopus database

    2-s2.0-85185476765