Search

The article focuses on a quantitative investigation of the principle of proportionality in the rulings of the Federal Constitutional Court. Topics include the examination of the principle's dominance in constitutional law, the innovative data collection methods used in the study, and a discussion of the findings in the context of current constitutional debates.

Copyright of Femina Politica is the property of Verlag Barbara Budrich GmbH and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article focuses on proportionality of interventions in the general freedom of action increases in the German fundamental rights system. It mentions freedom of individuals as private individuals is so comprehensively protected becomes, this raises the question of the relationship to her in a special way political freedom to help shape the law in democratic processes. It also mentions comparative perspective not part of the common good of constitutional statehood.

The article focuses on principle of proportionality allows for a restriction refer to the obligation to provide education for essential cases. It mentions plaintiff earned income from a commercial enterprise and determined his profit business assets comparison and disputed year 2017 income tax assessments for the first time. It also mentions expenditures before the balance sheet date are required, the effort for a specific time after that day represent income and expenses.

The article focuses on Article 203 of the German Value-Added Tax (VAT) principles of proportionality and the neutrality of VAT are to be interpreted as that they stand in the way of a national regulation. It mentions taxpayers acting in good faith are not allowed to post initiation of a tax audit procedure to correct invoices, in which VAT is wrongly reported. It also mentions Tax would have had if the sales that were the subject of invoices.

The article focuses on the Article 11 of the German Value-Added (VAT) Directive is in the light of the principles of legal certainty, to be interpreted in terms of proportionality and tax neutrality, that it is contrary to a national regulation which the possibility for a partnership. It mentions composition of the shareholders and changes of the articles of association. It also mentions economic and organizational point of view in the applicant in the main proceedings.

The article talks discusses cooperation of lawyers and non-lawyers mediators in a law firm or an office community is not permitted under applicable law. It mentions that lawyers are not allowed to practice their profession with everyone; and proportionality tends to correspond to compliance to set certain obligations to structural bans to avoid if possible.

The article offers an interpretation and discussion of the theories of Jörn Ipsen, a German state and constitutional law scholar, which criticize the notion of basic rights as underlying and supporting constitutional law. The author argues that the heavy influence of empirical factors on legal interpretation in constitutional law interpretation is a particularly contemporary phenomenon, and that constitutional law is therefore constructed. The notion of proportionality, used in interpreting constitutional law, thus refers to a standard of rationality external to the law and not to be derived from it. This however, according to the author, is no disadvantage in preserving legal rights.

The article discusses the notion of proportionality as a fundamental political and public law principal underlying constitutional law, and criticism of this viewpoint. The view common in liberal democracies that proportionality constitutes the fundamental aspect of global constitutionalism is contrasted with other views of social scientists who warn that it can lead to the abandonment of more fundamental rights in political doctrine. The author considers the collision of fundamental rights with the principal of proportionality, arguing that proportionality may be harmonized with other rights and serve as their guarantee.

The article discusses the globalization of the principle of proportionality in the use of violent force, quoting the political scientist Fritz Fleiner, who said that the use of force by police must always be proportional to the force used against them. Topics include related decisions by the European Union Court for Human Rights, national laws among European states beginning in the 1990s, and the constitutionalization of the principle. An analysis of the reception of the principle in the legal system of various countries outside Europe is presented, including Canada, South Africa, and Israel.

Under German law, the limitations of fundamental rights receive constitutional approval only if they pass the three-pronged proportionality test. Accordingly, rights limitations must be suitable, necessary and appropriate vis-à-vis a legitimate governmental purpose. Against this background, this article focuses on the proportionality principle as an example for the reception of German constitutional jurisprudence in transnational constitutional discourse. It provides a comparative overview on the dissemination of the proportionality test in other constitutional systems around the world. The article first outlines the function and applicability of the proportionality principle in German law. It then describes the reception of this principle in Europe and overseas, and compares the proportionality test's fundamental concepts and doctrinal development. While originating in German law, scholars and the courts typically scrutinize limitations of fundamental rights using different versions of proportionality test based on the European Convention on Human Rights, the law of the European Union and the constitutional law of most European states. Further, in countries such as Brazil, South Korea and Japan, German law has inspired the proportionality test analysis, despite considerable differences in its application. In contrast, Canadian jurisprudence has developed a distinct proportionality approach that focuses on the principle of minimal impairment of the right or freedom in question. While several common-law jurisdictions, such as Namibia and New Zealand, have followed this approach, others, such as Israel, have ultimately followed the German three-pronged proportionality test. Alternatively, the South African Constitutional Court treats the concepts of proportionality and balancing as virtually interchangeable. Moreover, the article explores the failure of United States courts to explicitly engage in proportionality analysis, and argues that American constitutional doctrine effectively incorporates elements of the proportionality test, albeit employing different terminology. Even legal systems that do not provide for the judicial review of fundamental rights limitations, such as in China or Iran, they in fact incorporate aspects of the proportionality concept. The article identifies a substantial international convergence on the proportionality test as the main criterion to determine the legitimacy of fundamental rights limitations. Yet, the reception models of the proportionality test diverge considerably: For example, in Canada and South Korea, the proportionality test is a means to implement the rule-exception relationship between fundamental rights and their limitations. In contrast, in South Africa, Japan and Brazil, the proportionality test seems to serve merely as the vehicle to allow ad hoc rights balancing. Finally, because the reception of constitutional concepts and doctrines is a mutual process, the article identifies elements from the application of the proportionality principle globally that Europe could follow as well. For instance, European courts may benefit from considering the Canadian and South Korean courts' emphasis on the necessity prong of the proportionality test. In any event, while steering and rationalizing the balancing process, the proportionality test cannot guarantee absolute neutrality in fundamental rights adjudication. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Law & Politics in Africa, Asia & Latin America / Verfassung und Recht in Übersee (VRÜ) is the property of Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article discusses a case before the Niedersächsisches Oberverwaltungsgericht (Upper Administrative Court of Lower Saxony, NdsOVG), decided on November 30, 2012, which revolved around the legality of an administrative act restricting the sale and consumption of alcoholic beverages in a residential area. The court used the case to clarify the legal definition of danger in municipal and state police ordinances, the proportionality of the act, and the use of common sense experience in such orders.