The collected data for each jurisdiction makes for engaging reading. It reveals details of the extent of visible (and sometimes implied) comparative activity that each of the courts displays in its jurisprudence. It also amounts to an assessment of the successes and shortcomings of the use of foreign precedent (in terms of the level of reciprocal influence of well-functioning constitutional ... Read moresystems) by judges that are more or less inhibited by their judicial culture to do so…The editors’ concluding chapter conveniently provides the reader with a comparative overview, both of the quantitative and qualitative results of the country reporters, and a tentative perspective on the future of comparative judicial practice in constitutional cases…The purpose and goals of the project are met by the book: we now have a clearer picture of how some of the most prominent constitutional courts deal (or desist from dealing) with comparable judgments in other countries.
François Venter
International Journal of Constitutional Law, Vol. 12, no 1
Show Less