Andere Kunden interessierten sich auch für
![Empirical Gap in Jurisprudence]( "Empirical Gap in Jurisprudence")
Empirical Gap in Jurisprudence80,99 €![Federalism and the Courts in Africa]( "Federalism and the Courts in Africa")
Federalism and the Courts in Africa184,99 €![The Community of the College of Justice]( "The Community of the College of Justice")
The Community of the College of Justice136,99 €![Constitutional Review in Western Europe]( "Constitutional Review in Western Europe")
Constitutional Review in Western Europe179,99 €![Building the Uk's New Supreme Court]( "Building the Uk's New Supreme Court")
Building the Uk's New Supreme Court215,99 €![Regulating Jurisdictional Relations Between National and International Courts]( "Regulating Jurisdictional Relations Between National and International Courts")
Regulating Jurisdictional Relations Between National and International Courts164,99 €![Courts and Comparative Law]( "Courts and Comparative Law")
Courts and Comparative Law244,99 €
This is a well-argued explication of a set of general criteria for deciding whether specialized adjudication in specialized tribunals or courts is more appropriate than generalist adjudication in ordinary court. Legomsky tests his theory against the working of the Administrative division of the New Zealand High Court, and ends with an assessment of the difficulties in comparison due to the diversity of governmental systems in states with different constitutional arrangements. A significant contribution to an increasingly important topic in American law--the role of specialized adjudicative units--this volume will be a valuable work for students and scholars of public law, the legal system, comparative law, and socio-legal studies.