Journal article
Reasonableness, proportionality and general grounds of judicial review: a response
- Abstract:
-
This is a response to an article written by Timothy Endicott, the principal thesis of which is that proportionality cannot and should not be a general ground of review. His thesis is predicated on doctrinal and normative assumptions. The doctrinal foundation for the thesis is mistaken, and the normative foundations are not tenable. It will be seen, moreover, that Endicott’s central thesis unravels, since he acknowledges that courts should intervene under the guise of reasonableness review in ...
Expand abstract
- Publication status:
- Published
- Peer review status:
- Peer reviewed
Actions
Access Document
- Files:
-
-
(Accepted manuscript, pdf, 311.9KB)
-
- Publication website:
- https://keelelawreview.com/volume-2
Authors
Bibliographic Details
- Publisher:
- Keele University Publisher's website
- Journal:
- Keele Law Review Journal website
- Volume:
- 2
- Issue:
- 2021
- Pages:
- 1-24
- Publication date:
- 2021-06-19
- ISSN:
-
2732-5679
Item Description
- Language:
- English
- Keywords:
- Pubs id:
-
1304547
- Local pid:
- pubs:1304547
- Deposit date:
- 2022-12-10
Terms of use
- Copyright holder:
- Keele Law Review
- Copyright date:
- 2021
- Rights statement:
- © 2021 Keele Law Review. All rights reserved.
- Notes:
- This is the accepted manuscript version of the article. The final version is available online from Keele Law Review.
Metrics
If you are the owner of this record, you can report an update to it here: Report update to this record