No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 December 2020
This work was partly supported by the Research Council of Norway through its Centres of Excellence funding scheme (project number 223274 - PluriCourts Centre) and the FRIPRO Young Research Talents (project number 274946 - State Consent to International Jurisdiction, Prof. Dr. Freya Baetens).
1 See, for example, N. Grossman et al. (eds.), Legitimacy and International Courts (2018); T. Squarito et al. (eds.), The Performance of International Courts and Tribunals (2018).
2 See, for example, B. Kingsbury et al., ‘The Emergence of Global Administrative Law’, (2005) 68 Law and Contemporary Problems 15.
3 See, for example, J. Waldron, ‘The Core of the Case against Judicial Review’, (2006) 115 Yale Law Journal 1346.
4 In setting out the theories on justification of domestic judicial review, Dothan refers to scholarly works on domestic judicial review in the US.
5 S. Dothan, International Judicial Review: When Should International Courts Intervene? (2020), 36.
6 E. Posner and C. Sunstein, ‘The Law of Other States’, (2006) 59 Stanford Law Review 131.
7 Dothan defines these types of behaviour as ‘(1) legalist models – judges try to implement the law itself in their judgments. (2) attitudinal models – judges decide sincerely based on their policy preferences. (3) strategic model judges try to promote their preferences strategically, taking into account the possible reactions of other actors’: supra note 5, at 63.
8 The ‘bandwidth hypothesis’ refers to a ‘network [resembling] a pipe through which information is transmitted, the denser the network, the wider the pipe and the more accurate information becomes’ whereas the ‘echo hypothesis’ argues that ‘information flow within a dense network is not enhanced but rather corrupted’: S. Dothan, ‘A Virtual Wall of Shame: The New Way of Imposing Reputational Sanctions on Defiant States’, (2017) 27 Duke Journal of Comparative and International Law 141, 182–3.