Judicial Review and Administrative Justice

T. Arvind, S. Halliday, Lindsay Stirton
{"title":"Judicial Review and Administrative Justice","authors":"T. Arvind, S. Halliday, Lindsay Stirton","doi":"10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190903084.013.6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There has been little dialogue or contact between the literatures on administrative justice and judicial review. This chapter argues that the two share common concerns and would benefit from closer engagement. Using a scheme based on Mary Douglas’s grid-group cultural theory, it suggests that judicial review can and does discharge a variety of tasks that are fundamentally concerned with administrative justice. A closer focus on these tasks, and on the contribution they make to infusing justice into the functioning of administrative government, has the potential to productively reframe the concerns of judicial review scholarship and overcome the current ‘clash of styles’ that currently characterises theoretical work in public law.","PeriodicalId":164528,"journal":{"name":"The Oxford Handbook of Administrative Justice","volume":"21 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Oxford Handbook of Administrative Justice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190903084.013.6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

There has been little dialogue or contact between the literatures on administrative justice and judicial review. This chapter argues that the two share common concerns and would benefit from closer engagement. Using a scheme based on Mary Douglas’s grid-group cultural theory, it suggests that judicial review can and does discharge a variety of tasks that are fundamentally concerned with administrative justice. A closer focus on these tasks, and on the contribution they make to infusing justice into the functioning of administrative government, has the potential to productively reframe the concerns of judicial review scholarship and overcome the current ‘clash of styles’ that currently characterises theoretical work in public law.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
司法审查与行政司法
关于行政司法与司法审查的文献很少有对话或接触。本章认为,双方有共同的关切,并将从更密切的接触中受益。采用基于玛丽·道格拉斯的网格-群体文化理论的方案,它表明司法审查能够并且确实履行了与行政司法基本相关的各种任务。更密切地关注这些任务,以及它们为将正义注入行政政府的运作所做的贡献,有可能有效地重新构建司法审查学术的关注点,并克服目前公法理论工作中存在的“风格冲突”。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Administrative Justice and Globalization Directions for Future Research on Administrative Justice The Individual and Administrative Justice The Future of Administrative Justice Collective Decision-Making and Administrative Justice
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1