Open Access
Towards a general typology of consensus analysis : from entrenching divergence to constituting convergence
Loading...
Files
CourtsWP_2022_306.pdf (1.17 MB)
Full-text in Open Access, Published Version
License
Cadmus Permanent Link
Full-text via DOI
ISBN
ISSN
2246-4891
Issue Date
Type of Publication
Keyword(s)
LC Subject Heading
Other Topic(s)
EUI Research Cluster(s)
Initial version
Published version
Succeeding version
Preceding version
Published version part
Earlier different version
Initial format
Author(s)
Citation
iCourts Working Paper; 2022/306
Cite
KUKAVICA, Jaka, Towards a general typology of consensus analysis : from entrenching divergence to constituting convergence, iCourts Working Paper, 2022/306 - https://hdl.handle.net/1814/74988
Abstract
Consensus analysis is a method of interpretation and an argumentative practice employed by some of the highest courts in multilevel legal systems, ranging from national federations to systems with origins in international law. In its most basic and most prevalent form, consensus analysis is used by courts when they interpret a legal norm of a higher-level legal order based on how this norm had been interpreted and implemented in lower-level legal orders – the constituent states. Though there is abundant literature on the applications of consensus analysis within specific jurisdictions, few, if any at all, have attempted to transcend the dependence of their analyses on a specific systemic context and to examine consensus analysis as a practice in the abstract. This chapter aims to begin to fill this gap. It analyses consensus analysis as used by the United States Supreme Court, the Court of Justice of the European Union, and the European Court of Human Rights to inductively devise a general typology of consensus analysis as used across different courts and institutional contexts. Establishing this typology is instrumental to our understanding that consensus may serve either as a converging or diverging mechanism for resolving conflicts in multilevel legal orders. Which of the two functions it serves will depend on what type of consensus is used by a specific court in an individual case.
Table of Contents
Additional Information
Published online on 31 October 2022