A Future Perspective on Judicial Review of Generally Binding Regulations in the Netherlands: Towards a Substantive Three-Step Proportionality Test?

2019 ◽  
pp. 83-101
Author(s):  
Jurgen de Poorter
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Future Perspective ◽  
Proportionality Test

Constitutional Review by the Judiciary in the Netherlands: A Bridge Too Far?

2010 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 275-290 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gerhard van der Schyff
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The Netherlands ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
United States Supreme Court ◽  
The United States ◽  
United States Supreme ◽  
Constitutional Review ◽  
Judicial Control ◽  
Chief Justice

One could be forgiven for thinking that constitutional review by the judiciary is invariably part of modern constitutionalism. Gone are the days that constitutions contained provisions that prevented the courts from testing the constitutionality of legislation, such as section 59 of South Africa's now repealed Constitution of 1961 that forbade the courts from inquiring into or pronouncing on the validity of legislation. It has come to be accepted in many quarters that a constitution presupposes judicial review in some form or another in gauging the integrity of legislation, instead of only relying on legislative wisdom as before. An attitude that echoes the views expressed inMarbury v. Madisonby Chief Justice Marshall of the United States Supreme Court, that by its very nature a written constitution implies judicial control. However, the Constitution of the Netherlands proves to be an exception in this regard, as section 120 states emphatically that:The constitutionality of Acts of Parliament and treaties shall not be reviewed by the courts.

scholarly journals Influence of Climate and Land Use Change on the Groundwater System of the Veluwe, The Netherlands: A Historical and Future Perspective

Water ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (10) ◽  
pp. 2866
Author(s):  
Marjolein H. J. Van Huijgevoort ◽  
Bernard R. Voortman ◽  
Sjoerd Rijpkema ◽  
Kelly H. S. Nijhuis ◽  
Jan-Philip M. Witte
Keyword(s):  
Land Use ◽  
Land Use Change ◽  
The Netherlands ◽  
Groundwater Recharge ◽  
Winter Precipitation ◽  
Pine Forest ◽  
Future Perspective ◽  
Historical Period ◽  
Groundwater Levels ◽  
The Future

Changes in land use and climate have a large influence on groundwater recharge and levels. In The Netherlands, precipitation shifts from summer to winter are expected, combined with an increase in summer temperature leading to higher evaporation. These changes in climate could threaten the fresh water supply and increase the importance of large groundwater reservoirs. Sustainable management of these groundwater reservoirs, therefore, is crucial. Changes in land use could help mitigate the effects of climate change by decreasing the evaporation. In this study, we investigate the effect of changes in climate and land use on a large groundwater reservoir in The Netherlands, the Veluwe, for a historical period (1850–2016) and in the future (2036–2065). During the historical period, evaporation increased due to conversions from heather and drift sand to pine forest across the Veluwe. This change in land use had a larger effect on the groundwater recharge than change in climate over the historical period. In the future, an increase in winter precipitation will lead to higher groundwater levels in the elevated parts of the region. Surrounding areas are more vulnerable to an increase in dry periods in the summer. Groundwater reservoirs provide an opportunity to store water during wetter periods, which could alleviate drought impacts in surrounding regions during dry periods. Land use change, such as conversion from pine forest to other land use types, is a possible measure to increase water availability.

scholarly journals Necessary Intrusion or Criminalising the Innocent? An Exploration of Modern Criminal Vetting

2012 ◽  
Vol 76 (2) ◽  
pp. 140-163 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chris Baldwin
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Soft Materials ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Judicial Interpretation ◽  
West Midlands ◽  
Subsequent Application ◽  
Legislative Framework ◽  
Home Department ◽  
Proportionality Test

This article considers the processes of criminal vetting and outlines the legislative framework allowing such disclosures and subsequent judicial interpretation of that framework. The focus is on disclosure of non-conviction (so-called ‘soft’) materials on ‘enhanced’ certificates and subsequent challenges to those disclosures at judicial review. Key cases are analysed, including R (on the application of X) v Chief Constable of West Midlands Police (2004) and R (on the application of L) (FC) (Appellant) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis (Respondent) (2009). The proportionality test in R (L) is noted and its subsequent application in the recent decisions of R (on the application of C) v Chief Constable of Greater Manchester; Secretary of State for the Home Department (2011) and R (on the application of B) v Chief Constable of Derbyshire Constabulary (2011) is scrutinised. The article also highlights interference in Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (right to privacy) and questions whether interference can be justified, and whether the present judicial focus on right of representations in such cases is misplaced.

Current Status and Future Perspective of General Surgical Trainees in the Netherlands

2007 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 119-124 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bas P. L. Wijnhoven ◽  
David I. Watson ◽  
Esther D. van den Ende
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Future Perspective ◽  
Surgical Trainees

17. Irrationality and Proportionality

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa Webley ◽  
Harriet Samuels
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
History Of ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
Complete Series ◽  
Explanatory Text ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Proportionality Test ◽  
Rights Issue

Titles in the Complete series combine extracts from a wide range of primary materials with clear explanatory text to provide readers with a complete introductory resource. This chapter, which discusses the circumstances for judicial review of a public authority’s decision on the grounds that it is irrational, first explains the history of irrationality and ‘Wednesbury unreasonableness’, to provide some background to the topic and to chart its development. It then considers cases in which the courts have discussed different versions of the irrationality test, discusses the difference between irrationality and proportionality, and examines the development of proportionality and its use in judicial review cases. The chapter distinguishes between proportionality and merits review, and discusses the use of judicial deference by the courts. Proportionality, and not irrationality, is the test used to determine whether a public authority has acted unlawfully when its decision is challenged by judicial review under section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998. The irrationality test is used in non Human Rights Act judicial review cases but the courts have also used the proportionality test in cases involving common law rights. The chapter concludes by considering the discussion in the case law and the scholarship as to whether the irrationality test should be replaced by the test of proportionality across both types of case: traditional judicial review cases and those involving a human rights issue.

8. Abuse of Discretion II

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Elliott ◽  
Jason Varuhas
Keyword(s):  
Decision Maker ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
Variable Intensity ◽  
English Law ◽  
Proportionality Test

This chapter examines grounds of judicial review that are substantive in two senses: it reduces the range of substantive options open to a decision-maker, or it involves judicial examination of the quality of the reasons for the decision itself, rather than the quality of the process adopted by the decision-maker. The chapter first considers the doctrine of reasonableness or rationality in administrative law before discussing the doctrine of proportionality and the notion of judicial deference in relation to variable intensity review. It also explores the role of the proportionality test in English law and the question of whether English courts are heading towards jettisoning the reasonableness doctrine in favour of utilizing proportionality in all relevant cases.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document