La dynamique de la déférence: création et évolution des modèles auto-restrictives de contrôle juridictionnel dans le droit comparé
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5380/rinc.v2i3.44531Palavras-chave:
dynamique de la déférence, contrôle juridictionnel, administration publique, création et évolution, droit comparéResumo
Cet article examine la création et l’évolution des modèles déférentiels de contrôle dans quatre systèmes juridiques (France, Italie, Etats-Unis et Canada). Cette perspective historique servira à démontrer (i) que la position juridictionnelle auto-restrictive peut avoir des significations très distinctes et (ii) que dans certains systèmes juridiques, la déférence est fortement disséminée, alors que dans d’autres, elle se trouve en plein déclin.
Referências
BONNARD, Roger. Le Contrôle Juridictionnel de l’Administration: Étude de Droit Administratif Comparé. Paris: Dalloz, 2005.
BRÉCHON-MOULÈNES Christine. La place du juge administratif dans le contentieux économique public. Actualité juridique - Droit Administratif, Paris, v. 56, n. 9, p. 679-686, sept. 2000.
CRAIG, Jared. Defending city hall after Dunsmuir. Alberta Law Review Edmonton, v. 46, n. 1, p. 275-297, nov. 2008.
DYZENHAUS, David. The politics of deference: judicial review and democracy. In: TAGGART, Michael (ed.). The Province of Administrative Law. Oxford: Hart Publishing, 1997.
DYZENHAUS, David. The logic of the rule of law: lessons from Willis. The University of Toronto Law Journal, Toronto, v. 55, n. 3, p. 691-714, jun./sept. 2005.
DYZENHAUS, David; FOX-DECENT, Evan. Rethinking the process/substance distinction: Baker versus Canada. The University of Toronto Law Journal, Toronto, v. 51, n. 3, p. 193-242, jun./sept. 2001.
ESSENS, Oda; GERBRANDY, Anna; LAVRIJSSEN, Saskia (Ed.). National Courts and the Standard of Review in Competition Law and Economic Regulation. Groningen: Europa Law Publishing, 2009.
GARRY, Patrick M. Judicial review and the ‘hard-look’ doctrine. The Nevada Law Journal, Las Vegas, v. 7, n. 1, p. 151-170, sept./dec. 2006.
JACOBS, Laverne. Developments in administrative law: the 2007-2008 term – The impact of Dunsmuir. Supreme Court Law Review, Ottawa, v. 43, n. 2, p. 1-34, dec. 2008.
JAFFE, Louis L. The right to judicial review I. Harvard Law Review, New Haven, v. 71, n. 3, p. 401-437.
KALUSYNZKI, Martine. La fonction politique de la Justice: regards historiques. Du souci d’historicité à la pertinence de l’historicisation. In: COMMAILLE, Jacques; KALUSZYNSKI, Martine (Dirs.). La Fonction Politique de la Justice. Paris: Éditions La Découvert, 2007.
LANGILLE, Brian. Judicial review, judicial revisionism and judicial responsibility. Revue Générale de Droit, Ottawa, v. 17, n. 1-2, p. 169-192, 1986.
LI, Zhang. Le Contrôle Juridictionnel de la Légalité des Actes Administratifs en Chine: Eléments d’Analyse Comparée des Contentieux Administratifs Chinois et Français. Bruxelles: Bruylant, 2010.
MACKLIN, Audrey. Standard of review: the pragmatic and functional test. In: FLOOD, Coleen; SOSSIN, Lorne (Eds.). Administrative Law in Context. Toronto, Emond Montgomery, 2008.
MARCHETTI, Barbara. Pubblica Amministrazione e Corti negli Stati Uniti: il Judicial Review sulle Administrative Agencies. Padova: CEDAM, 2005.
MERRILL, Thomas W. Judicial deference to Executive precedent. The Yale Law Journal, New Haven, v. 101, n. 5, p. 969-1041, mar. 1992.
MERRILL, Thomas W. The story of Chevron: the making of an accidental landmark. In: STRAUSS, Peter (Ed.). Administrative Law Stories. New York: Thomsom/West, 2006.
MULLAN, David J. Recent developments in administrative law – The apparent triumph of deference! Canadian Journal of Administrative Law and Practice, v. 12, n. 2, p. 191-, 1998.
ODENT, Raymond. Contentieux Administratif. Paris: Institut d’Études Politiques de Paris, 1971.
RISK, Richard C. B. In Memoriam: John Willis. The University of Toronto Law Journal, Toronto, v. 47, p. 301-304, 1997.
SUNSTEIN, Cass R. Deregulation and the hard-look doctrine. The Supreme Court Review, Chicago, v. 24, p. 177-213, 1983.
SUNSTEIN, Cass R. Law and administration after Chevron. Columbia Law Review, New York, v. 90, n. 8, p. 2071-2120, dec. 1990.
TRUCHET, Didier. Droit Administratif. 3. ed. Paris: PUF, 2010.
WERHAN, Keith. The neoclassical revival in administrative law. Administrative Law Review, Washington, v. 44, n. 3, p. 567-628, dec.1992.
WILLIS, John. Three approaches to administrative law: the judicial, the conceptual and the functional. The University of Toronto Law Journal, Toronto, v. 1, p. 53-81, 1935.
WOOLHANDLER, Ann. Judicial deference to administrative action – A revisionist history. Administrative Law Review, Washington, v. 43, p. 197-223, 1991.
Downloads
Como Citar
Edição
Seção
Licença
Autores que publicam nesta revista concordam com os seguintes termos:- Autores mantém os direitos autorais e concedem à revista o direito de primeira publicação, com o trabalho simultaneamente licenciado sob a Creative Commons - Atribuição 4.0 Internacional que permite o compartilhamento do trabalho com reconhecimento da autoria e publicação inicial nesta revista.
- Autores têm autorização para assumir contratos adicionais separadamente, para distribuição não-exclusiva da versão do trabalho publicada nesta revista (ex.: publicar em repositório institucional ou como capítulo de livro), com reconhecimento de autoria e publicação inicial nesta revista.
- Autores têm permissão e são estimulados a publicar e distribuir seu trabalho online (ex.: em repositórios institucionais ou na sua página pessoal) a qualquer ponto antes ou durante o processo editorial, já que isso pode gerar alterações produtivas, bem como aumentar o impacto e a citação do trabalho publicado (Veja O Efeito do Acesso Livre).




















