Proportionality or Rationality in Socio-Economic Rights Adjudication? Case Study of the Czech Constitutional Court’s Judgment in Compulsory Vaccination Case

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F61989592%3A15220%2F18%3A73587052" target="_blank" >RIV/61989592:15220/18:73587052 - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

<a href="http://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/10045128/" target="_blank" >http://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/10045128/</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.14324/111.2052-1871.098" target="_blank" >10.14324/111.2052-1871.098</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

Proportionality or Rationality in Socio-Economic Rights Adjudication? Case Study of the Czech Constitutional Court’s Judgment in Compulsory Vaccination Case

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

Proportionality represents the basic methodological approach towards constitutional rights adjudication. The million-dollar question raised in current doctrinal work is the question of its limits. One such limit concerns the applicability of the doctrine to socioeconomic rights. Since the doctrine and case law of constitutional courts do not provide clear answers in this regard, the main goal of this paper is to assess whether proportionality is a suitable method to review interferences with socio-economic rights. First, the paper discusses the theoretical aspects of this issue, primarily the paradigmatic structure of constitutional review. Second, the paper continues with a case study of the Czech Constitutional Court. In order to review interferences of these rights, the Constitutional Court applies the rationality test. The abstract definition of the test implies only means-ends analysis. Notwithstanding this, it represents an open-ended standard akin to proportionality. The paper concludes by assessing whether there are differences between these two standards of review of reasonableness.

Název v anglickém jazyce

Proportionality or Rationality in Socio-Economic Rights Adjudication? Case Study of the Czech Constitutional Court’s Judgment in Compulsory Vaccination Case

Popis výsledku anglicky

Proportionality represents the basic methodological approach towards constitutional rights adjudication. The million-dollar question raised in current doctrinal work is the question of its limits. One such limit concerns the applicability of the doctrine to socioeconomic rights. Since the doctrine and case law of constitutional courts do not provide clear answers in this regard, the main goal of this paper is to assess whether proportionality is a suitable method to review interferences with socio-economic rights. First, the paper discusses the theoretical aspects of this issue, primarily the paradigmatic structure of constitutional review. Second, the paper continues with a case study of the Czech Constitutional Court. In order to review interferences of these rights, the Constitutional Court applies the rationality test. The abstract definition of the test implies only means-ends analysis. Notwithstanding this, it represents an open-ended standard akin to proportionality. The paper concludes by assessing whether there are differences between these two standards of review of reasonableness.

Druh

J_ost - Ostatní články v recenzovaných periodicích

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

50501 - Law

Projekt

—

Návaznosti

S - Specificky vyzkum na vysokych skolach

Rok uplatnění

2018

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

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

Název periodika

UCL Journal of Law and Jurisprudence

ISSN

2052-1871

e-ISSN

—

Svazek periodika

2018

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

1

Stát vydavatele periodika

GB - Spojené království Velké Británie a Severního Irska

Počet stran výsledku

17

Strana od-do

86-102

Kód UT WoS článku

—

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

—