Search

The Oxford Handbook of Administrative Justice examines the wide range of scholarship exploring the administrative decisions made by public authorities that affect individual citizens and the mechanisms available for the provision of redress. The Handbook identifies and provides a survey of key transnational themes in administrative justice research, considers theoretical and methodological approaches to administrative justice, and provides a view of the future of administrative justice research. One aspect of administrative justice, namely the study of law and administration, is a core component of law school syllabuses and scholarly research around the world. For many public lawyers, this area of study has been focused heavily on legalistic redress systems (e.g. judicial review). Justice against administrations, however, is delivered through a much broader range of mechanisms than legalistic processes alone: fair initial decision-making procedures, internal review systems, ombuds, administrative tribunals/adjudication, and other institutions play a vital role. Despite their importance to modern governance across the globe (and to the lives of individual citizens), these broader aspects of administrative justice have been left relatively neglected and under-researched, and the Handbook represents a groundbreaking achievement in establishing administrative justice research as a vital and discrete area of study. The Oxford Handbook of Administrative Justice will be an essential resource for legal scholars and social scientists wishing to understand the complexity of this important field.

The public sector ombudsman has become one of the most important administrative justice institutions in many countries around the world. This international and interdisciplinary Research Handbook brings together leading scholars and practitioners to discuss the state-of-the-art research on this increasingly prominent institution. Traditionally, research on the ombudsman has been conducted from a purely prescriptive or (legal) descriptive perspective, mainly focusing on the ombudsman'in the books'. By contrast, this book illustrates how empirical research may contribute to a better understanding of the ombudsman'in action'. It uses new empirical studies and competing theoretical explanations to critically examine important aspects of the ombudsman's work. The Research Handbook is organized in to four parts: fundamentals of the ombudsman; the evolution of the ombudsman; evaluation of the ombudsman; and the ombudsman office and profession. Featuring case studies from Europe, Canada, Asia, Africa, Latin America and Australia, chapters provide a comprehensive global perspective on the issues at hand. This unique Research Handbook will be of great value to researchers in the fields of public law, socio-legal studies and alternative dispute resolution who have an interest in the ombudsman. It will also be a valuable resource for policymakers and practitioners, particularly those working within ombudsman offices.Contributors include: V. Ayeni, C.A. Barco, A. Bedner, R. Behrens, V. Bondy, B. Bradford, A. Brenninkmeijer, S. Carl, J. Chan, N. Creutzfeldt, J. Dahlvik, M. de Langen, M. Doyle, L. Díez, C. Gill, E. Govers, M. Groves, C. Harlow, M. Hertogh, C. Hodges, B. Hubeau, R. Kirkham, M. Lezertua, J. McMillan, N. O'Brien, A. Pohn-Weidinger, L.C. Reif, M. Remác, A. Stumckhe, P. Tyndall, B. Tai, Y. van der Vlugt, E. van Gelder, R. van Zutphen, V. Wong

Nobody's Law shows how people – who are disappointed, disenchanted, and outraged about the justice system – gradually move away from law. Using detailed case studies and combining different theoretical perspectives, this book explores the legal consciousness of ordinary people, businessmen, and street-level bureaucrats in the Netherlands. The empirical research in this study tells an original and alternative narrative about the role of law in everyday life. While previous studies emphasize the law's hegemony and argue that it's ‘all over', Hertogh shows that legal proliferation makes it harder for people to know, and subsequently identify with, the law. As a result, official law has become increasingly remote and irrelevant to many people. The central finding presented in this highly topical text is that these developments signal a process of ‘legal alienation'— a gradual and mundane process with potentially serious consequences for the legitimacy of law. A timely and original study, this book will be of particular interest to scholars in the fields of law and society, socio-legal studies and legal theory.

Met de actuele discussie over de toekomst van de verzorgingsstaat staat ook de hand having in de sociale zekerheid hoog op de politieke en maatschappelijke agenda. Deze bundel doet verslag van de resultaten van een empirisch onderzoek naar hand having in de sociale zekerheid dat in de periode 2014-2018 is uitgevoerd aan de Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. Op basis van uitgebreide casestudies bij UWV en sociale dienst en eenlandelijke enquête onder meer dan duizend uitkeringsgerechtigden wordt een nieuw perspectief op handhaving geïntroduceerd. Het onderzoek laat zien dat het nalevingsniveau in de sociale zekerheid niet zozeer is gebaat bij ‘meer'handhaving, maar bij ‘slimmere'handhaving. Anders gezegd, de effectiviteit van de handhaving in de sociale zekerheid wordt niet alleen bepaald door hardere of softere maatregelen, maar ook door de mate waarin de handhavingsstijl is afgestemd op de specifieke achtergronden en verwachtingen van de uitkeringsgerechtigde.

This collection of essays is the first edited volume in the English language which is entirely dedicated to the work of Eugen Ehrlich. Eugen Ehrlich (1862-1922) was an eminent Austrian legal theorist and professor of Roman law. He is considered by many as one of the'founding fathers'of modern sociology of law. Although the importance of his work (including his concept of'living law') is widely recognised, Ehrlich has not yet received the serious international attention he deserves. Therefore, this collection of essays is aimed at'reconsidering'Eugen Ehrlich by bringing together an interdisciplinary group of leading international experts to discuss both the historical and theoretical context of his work and its relevance for contemporary law and society scholarship. This book has been divided into four parts. Part I of this volume paints a lively picture of the Bukowina, in southeastern Europe, where Ehrlich was born in 1862. Moreover it considers the political and academic atmosphere at the end of the nineteenth century. Part II discusses the main concepts and ideas of Ehrlich's sociology of law and considers the reception of Ehrlich's work in the German speaking world, in the United States and in Japan. Part III of this volume is concerned with the work of Ehrlich in relation to that of some his contemporaries, including Roscoe Pound, Hans Kelsen and Cornelis van Vollenhoven. Part IV focuses on the relevance of Ehrlich's work for current socio-legal studies.This volume provides both an introduction to the important and innovative scholarship of Eugen Ehrlich as well as a starting point for further reading and discussion.

How effective are the courts in controlling bureaucracies? What impact does judicial review have on the agencies which are targeted by its rulings? For the first time, this book brings together the insights of two intellectual disciplines which have hitherto explored these questions separately: political science and law/socio-legal studies. Leading international scholars from both fields present new research which focuses on the relationship between judicial review and bureaucratic behaviour. Individual contributors discuss fundamental conceptual and methodological issues, in addition to presenting a number of empirical case studies from various parts of the world: the United States, Canada, Australia, Israel, and the United Kingdom. This volume constitutes a landmark text offering an international, interdisciplinary and empirical perspective on judicial review's impact on bureaucracies. It will significantly advance the research agenda concerning judicial review and its relationship to social change.