This book of essays,the product of a conference held at the University of Birmingham in the spring of 1998, contains contributions from a group of extremely distinguished scholars in the fields of both public and private law. The meaning of proportionality is examined in a number of different contexts, including those of EC law, the domestic law of the Member States of the EU and the law of the European Convention on Human Rights. Its substantive content and procedural implications are analysed and contrasted, in particular, with the concept of Wednesbury unreasonableness. Its use in criminal and anti-discrimination law is also examined, as is its future likely impact in the UK after incorporation of the European Convention. Contributors: Paul Craig, Evelyn Ellis, David Feldman, Nicholas Green QC, Lord Hoffmann, Francis G. Jacobs, Jeremy McBride, Takis Tridimas, Walter van Gerven.

The main objective of this study is to present a comparative legal analysis of proportionality. It provides a close examination of the key areas in which this principle has been applied, both at the national and supranational levels. The whole work is placed in the context of transformation of public law in the twentieth century. As many important general principles of law as applied by the Court of Justice have been borrowed from German and French law, a comparative study of the various forms which this principle has assumed in both German and French public law is presented. The book then offers an in-depth analysis of the application and impact of the principle of proportionality in EC law. The introduction and development of this principle by the Court of Justice represents one of the most striking examples of the interaction between the Community and national legal systems. It also illustrates the character of Community law as developed by the Court and the law-making function of the latter.

The proportionality principle has become ever more important in European law and elsewhere. The career of the principle has attracted considerable attention from legal practitioners, legal theorists and political scientists alike, but the debate so far has been quite fragmented. In this new book the author offers a broad and systematic analysis of the proportionality principle. Discussing and comparing proportionality analysis as applied by European courts in part one of the book, the author proceeds to contrast proportionality analysis with alternative assessment schemes. In the third part of the book the author reaches beyond doctrinal reconstructions as he deciphers the functions of proportionality jurisprudence. In view of the various facets of proportionality analysis the author departs from the asserted infringement of a legally protected position by some regulatory act, proceeds to discuss the legitimacy of this intervention and undertakes an analysis of its suitability, appropriateness and necessity. According to the author, the safe grounds of proportionality means-ends rationality do not suffice where the legitimacy of an infringement has to be assessed, where conflicting values have to be “balanced” or where courts engage in a proportionality analysis “stricto sensu”. In the concluding remarks, the author proposes how proportionality analysis may be structured in order to better secure the legitimacy of the analysis.

In this edited volume, scholars from a wide range of areas of international law consider whose interests are at stake in the application of the principle of proportionality. In so doing, the volume casts new light this important principle.

The book applies the principle of proportionality to a number of conventional wisdoms in the social sciences, such as in dubio pro reo and the assumption that a crime is always a crime; that you must go to war if instructed to do so. Individuals and states are not obliged to come to the aid of stricken individuals and states. The book is organised in seven chapters, each dealing with a self-standing theme related to proportionality.

This book addresses the interplay between the proportionality principle and EU digital law. Does EU digital law provide a fair balance of rights and interests? How does proportionality limit legislation in the digital economy? How can it be used to balance competing rights and interests? Diving into the dialectics of law and technology, the book analyses the relevance of the proportionality principle in regulating the digital world and as a vital tool for balancing competing rights and interests. The chapters analyse how conflicting rights and interests are resolved in EU digital law through the proportionality principle and critically reflect on its application. They scrutinise recent EU regulatory initiatives such as the GDPR, AI Act, Copyright Directive, DSA, and more. They reflect on the unique context of AI systems regulation, digital marketing, and data protection, illuminating the application and impact of proportionality in these arenas. Providing an in-depth examination of legal actors and real-life conflicts resolved by applying EU digital law, the book explains the pivotal role of the principle of proportionality in achieving an optimal balance of rights in our digital era.

Examining general principles of law provides one of the most instructive examples of the intersection between EU law and comparative law. This collection draws on the expertise of high-profile and distinguished scholars to provide a critical examination of this interaction. It shows how general principles of EU law need to be responsive to national laws. In addition, it is clear that the laws of the Member States have no choice but to be responsive to the general principles which are developed through EU law. Viewed through the perspective of proportionality, legal certainty, and fundamental rights, the dynamic relationship between the ingenuity of the Court of Justice, the legislative process and the process of Treaty revision is comprehensively illustrated.

In one of the most important publications on the European Convention and Court of Human Rights in recent years, a wide range of fundamental practical and theoretical problems of crucial importance are addressed in an original and critical way bringing a fresh, coherent and innovative order into well-known battle zones. The analysis revolves around the Court’s fair balance-test and comprises in-depth analyses of e.g. methods of interpretation, proportionality, the least onerous means-test, the notion of absolute rights, subsidiarity, formal and substantive principles, evidentiary standards, proceduralisation of substantive rights etc. The author coins the term of “primarity” in order to clarify the obligation of the Contracting Parties to implement the Convention in domestic law.

5.2.3. Burden of Proof