Italian Constitutional Justice in Global Context is the first book ever published in English to provide an international examination of the Italian Constitutional Court (ItCC), offering a comprehensive analysis of its principal lines of jurisprudence, historical origins, organization, procedures, and its current engagement with transnational European law. The ItCC represents one of the strongest and most successful examples of constitutional judicial review, and is distinctive in its structure, institutional dimensions, and well-developed jurisprudence. Moreover, the ItCC has developed a distinctive voice among global constitutional actors in its adjudication of a broad range of topics from fundamental rights and liberties to the allocations of governmental power and regionalism. Nevertheless, in global constitutional dialog, the voice of the ItCC has been almost entirely absent due to a relative lack of both English translations of its decisions and of focused scholarly commentary in English. This book describes the "Italian Style" in global constitutional adjudication, and aims to elevate Italian constitutional jurisprudence to an active participant role in global constitutional discourse. The authors have carefully structured the work to allow the ItCC's own voice to emerge. It presents broad syntheses of major areas of the Court's case law, provides excerpts from notable decisions in a narrative and analytical context, addresses the tension between the ItCC and the Court of Cassation, and positions the development, character, and importance of the ItCC's jurisprudence in the larger arc of global judicial dialog.

This book introduces the reader to the Italian Constitution, which entered into force on 1 January 1948, and examines whether it has successfully managed the political and legal challenges that have occurred since its inception, and fulfilled the three main functions of a Constitution: maintaining a community, protecting the fundamental rights of citizens and ensuring the separation of powers.

"The Lisbon Treaty states that national Parliaments shall contribute to a better functioning of the EU. Can they really do it and therefore enrich the European democracy? How far can they extend their original sovereignty without distorting political responsibilities that should be geared upon the European Parliament? The authors analyze the experience of the Italian Parliament under the light of these crucial questions and their exhaustive answers are greatly helpful to the readers of all over Europe." Giuliano Amato, Judge of the Italian Constitutional Court. This important new collection explores the role of the Italian Parliament in the Euro-national parliamentary system as an example of an increased role for national parliaments within the composite European constitutional order. It illustrates how parliamentary interactions within the European Union are highly systematic, with integrated procedures and mutual interdependence between the various institutions and stakeholders. The book argues that this dynamic is vital for both the functioning and the future equilibrium of democracy in the EU. This is significant, particularly given the challenges posed to democracy within the EU institutions and the Member States. Notwithstanding its peculiarities (a symmetrical bicameral system in which both Houses are directly elected, hold the same powers and are linked through a confidence relationship with the government), the Italian Parliament deserves specific attention as a lively active player of the European polity. The grid for its analysis proposed by this collection may also be applied to other national parliaments, so contributing to the development of comparative research in this field.

In an unresolved ongoing debate, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) is often included among the institutional actors responsible for the declining condition of labour law in Europe. Has its case law been more protective of employers’ interests than of workers’ rights? This innovative book greatly enhances the discussion by bringing to light the judicial lawmaking logic, other than those pertaining to the balancing of social and business values, that drive the CJEU’s reasoning in its interpretation of the labour law provisions enshrined in the European Union (EU) law, with particular attention to the directive on transfer of undertakings. Addressing fundamental issues – such as uneven bargaining power, labour as a commodity, coexistence of workers’ rights and the market economy – in the context of judicial lawmaking, the author clearly defines the tensions at work: What normative models underlie the approaches of EU institutional policymakers with respect to labour law? Does the CJEU have its own vision of the socioeconomic model to which the Union should adhere? How does the CJEU’s interpretative approach stand in relation to the transformation processes that regulators impose on labour law? Is the CJEU particularly attentive to the preferences expressed by national governments, especially those from the most politically influential states, or rather reflect the political pressure of the European Commission? What is the role of trans-judicial dynamics in shaping the CJEU’s reasoning in labour law cases? The study is extraordinarily thorough, drawing on a wide range of policy documents, scholarly and doctrinal research, and the entire body of the CJEU’s case law on transfer of undertakings. The legal arguments that the CJEU has developed over the years are mapped and classified according to their affinity with the labour law functions that underlie them. With its comprehensive assessment of the normative implications of EU policymaking in the labour and social domains, its thorough exploration of the CJEU’s judicial lawmaking dynamics, and its extensive empirical legal analysis of the CJEU’s case law on transfer of undertakings, the book has no peers in revealing the forces that guide the CJEU’s decisions in the realm of labour law. Of particular value to scholars and researchers interested in EU social policies and constitutional law, the book will also prove of immeasurable value to labour law practitioners aiming to use the case law of the CJEU, as well as to in-house counsel, industrial relation specialists, and trade unionists.

This collection adopts a distinctive method and structure to introduce the work of Italian constitutional law scholars into the Anglophone dialogue while also bringing a number of prominent non-Italian constitutional law scholars to study and write about constitutional justice in a global context. The work presents six distinct areas of particular interest from a comparative constitutional perspective: first, the role of legal scholarship in the work of constitutional courts; second, structures and processes that contribute to more “open” or “closed” styles of constitutional adjudication; third, pros and cons of collegiality in the work of constitutional courts; fourth, forms of access by individuals to constitutional justice; fifth, methods of constitutional interpretation; and sixth, the relationship between national constitutional adjudication and the transnational context. In each of these six areas, the volume sets up a new and genuine constitutional dialogue between an Italian scholar presenting a discussion and critical assessment of the specific topic, and a non-Italian scholar who responds elaborating the issue as seen from constitutional law beyond the Italian system. The resulting six such dialogues thus provide a dynamic, in-depth, multidimensional, national and transnational/comparative examination of these areas in which the `Italian style’ of constitutional adjudication has a distinctive contribution to make to comparative constitutional law in general. Fostering a deeper knowledge of the Italian Constitutional Court within the comparative global space and advancing a creative and fruitful methodological approach, the book will be fascinating reading for academics and researchers in comparative constitutional law.

Introduced in 2008, the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities has existed for nearly a decade. This comprehensive study examines how courts in thirteen different jurisdictions make use of the Convention. The first sustained comparative international law analysis of the CRPD, Waddington and Lawsons ground breaking text illuminates the intersection between human rights law, disability law and international law through an examination of the role of courts. The first part of the book contains chapters specific to each jurisdiction. The second part consists of comparative chapters which draw on the rich analysis of the jurisdiction-specific chapters. These chapters reflect on emerging patterns of judicial usage and interpretation of the CRPD and on the wider implications for human rights theory and the nascent field of international comparative human rights law. This volume is a vital and thought-provoking addition to the literature on comparative international law and disability rights.

Constitutions are a product of history, but what is the role of history in interpreting and applying constitutional provisions? This volume addresses that question from a comparative perspective, examining different uses of history by courts in constitutional adjudication.

This two-volume set examines the origins and growth of judicial review in the key G-20 constitutional democracies, which include the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Japan, Italy, India, Canada, Australia, South Korea, Brazil, South Africa, Indonesia, Mexico, and the European Union, as well as Israel. The volumes consider five different theories, which help to explain the origins of judicial review, and identify which theories apply best in the various countries discussed. They consider not only what gives rise to judicial review originally, but also what causes of judicial review lead it to become more powerful and prominent over time. Volume Two discusses the G-20 civil law countries.

"This book examines the origins and growth of judicial review in the key G-20 constitutional democracies, which include: the United States; the United Kingdom; France; Germany; Japan; Italy; India; Canada; Australia; South Korea; Brazil; South Africa; Indonesia; Mexico; and the European Union. The book considers five different theories, which help to explain the origins of judicial review, and it identifies which theories apply best in the various countries discussed. It considers not on what gives rise to judicial review originally, but also what causes of judicial review lead it to become more powerful and prominent over times. The positive account of what causes the origins and growth of judicial review in so many very different countries over such a long period of time has normative implications"--