Using Comparative Reasoning in Human Rights Adjudication: The Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Court of Human Rights Compared

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

10 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This article examines the relationship between the methods that the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) use to decide disputes that involve ‘human’ or ‘fundamental’ rights claims, and the substantive outcomes that result from the use of these particular methods. It has a limited aim: in attempting to understand the interrelationship between human rights methodology and human rights outcomes, it considers primarily the use of ‘comparative reasoning’ in ‘human’ and ‘fundamental’ rights claims by these courts. It is not primarily concerned with examining the extent to which the use of comparative reasoning is based on an appropriate methodology or whether there is a persuasive normative theory underpinning the use of comparative reasoning. The issues considered in this chapter do some of the groundwork, however, that is necessary in order to address these methodological and normative questions.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)383-415
Number of pages32
JournalCambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies
Volume15
Publication statusPublished - 2013

Keywords

  • Court of Justice of the European Union, European Court of Human Rights, use of comparative jurisprudence, human rights

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Law

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Using Comparative Reasoning in Human Rights Adjudication: The Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Court of Human Rights Compared'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this