Suchergebnisse

This volume of "Studies in Law, Politics, and Society" presents a diverse array of interdisciplinary research. It contains articles by scholars from political science, sociology, and law. These articles examine the legal treatment of 'suspect' populations, the work of legal actors, and the works of various legal devices. Taken together the work published in this volume exemplifies the kind exciting and innovative work now being done by legal scholars from different disciplines. This book contains contributions from law and society scholars from political science, anthropology, sociology, and law and a comprehensive assessment of the state-of-the-field, its past, and its trajectory for the future.

This paper focuses on socioeconomic disadvantage as a significant source of inequality in the realm of housing. Taking into account international and European human rights law, as well as selected domestic systems, it will show how anti-discrimination law has a significant role to play in addressing socioeconomic inequalities in the field of housing. Part I will explore the notion of non-discrimination on the grounds of socioeconomic status. Part II will examine two specific mechanisms to incorporate socioeconomic considerations into anti-discrimination legislation: public sector equality duties, and the inclusion of socioeconomic disadvantage as a prohibited ground of discrimination. Part III brings the discussion further into the context of housing. The paper concludes by suggesting that anti-discrimination law can be mobilised to secure the effective exercise of the right to housing by socioeconomically disadvantaged groups.

Abstract no. 12 ; With the introduction of the Bill of Rights in 1991 and the Basic Law in 1997, the demarcation between constitutional law and traditional judicial review in administrative law has become increasingly blurred. In one sense, a challenge against an administrative decision for being contrary to the Basic Law is nothing more than an application of the doctrine of ultra vires under traditional judicial review. Yet the possibility of challenging the vires of the enabling legislation has considerably widened the scope of judicial review, as an administrative decision can be challenged, not just by attacking the decision itself, but also by attacking the vires of the source of powers. This possibility presents new challenges to the judiciary in granting remedies, as the consequences and implications could be much far-reaching. At the same time, the trend of combining constitutional challenges in traditional judicial review applications raises the question how far the existing procedure for judicial review is adequate to meet this new challenge. This paper examines how the Hong Kong courts have risen to these challenges. ; published_or_final_version ; Joint Symposium of three law schools of the Hong Kong University, the National University of Singapore, and the Singapore Management University (HKU-NUS-SMU Symposium), Singapore, 1-2 December 2008.