Aileen Kavanagh
Biographic Data
| ID | 3703063 |
|---|---|
| NAME | Aileen Kavanagh |
| GIVEN NAMES | Aileen |
| FAMILY NAME | Kavanagh |
| SIGNATURE | KAVANAGH A |
| AFFILIATIONS | University of Oxford |
| ORCID | 0000-0001-6179-5140 |
| VERIFIED | Yes |
| TOTAL WORKS | 8 |
| TOTAL CITATIONS | 9 |
| AUTHOR COUNT | 8 |
| EDITOR COUNT | 0 |
| FIRST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2004 |
| LATEST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2025 |
| H-INDEX | 2 |
Underuse of the Override
The power of the legislature to override court rulings on rights—and to legislate ‘notwithstanding’ rights—is one of the most notable and controversial features of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms 1982 and the UK Human Rights Act 1998 . By giving courts the power to protect rights, whilst giving the legislature the last word, the legislative override seems to solve the notorious counter-majoritarian difficulty. Yet in both jurisdiction…
El papel de los jueces en el marco de una carta de derechos: Una teoría de la contención judicial = The Role of Courts under a Bill of Rights: A Theory of Judicial Restraint
Este trabajo tiene un doble objetivo. La primera parte ofrece una visión de conjunto del sistema de derechos configurado en el Reino Unido mediante la Human Rights Act de 1998, donde se trata de mostrar que, a pesar de haber sido descrito como un ejemplo destacado de la revisión judicial "débil" de constitucionalidad, el sistema británico muestra en realidad muchos rasgos de sutil fortaleza. En la segunda parte se toma como referencia la jurispru…
The lure and the limits of dialogue
Over the last two decades, the metaphor of ‘dialogue’ has become a common way of characterizing the relationship between courts and legislatures under bills of rights. Following an examination of the role of ‘dialogue’ in debates about the Canadian Charter and the UK Human Rights Act, this article will argue that dialogue is a misleading metaphor, which we should abandon in our constitutional discourse. While it may have contributed some potentia…
Judicial Restraint in the Pursuit of Justice
This article examines the reasons in favour of judicial restraint in human-rights adjudication. It seeks to address the worry that a strategy of restraint may lead judges to refrain from protecting rights, or, at least, to refrain from protecting them to an optimal degree. Beyond this, it considers the way in which the concern to protect the reputation of the courts can give rise to judicial restraint. Finally, it explores the possibility that co…
Cases: Special Advocates, Control Orders and the Right to a Fair Trial
In Secretary of State for the Home Department v AF (No 3), the House of Lords decided that Article 6 ECHR requires a ‘core irreducible minimum’ of procedural fairness such that ‘the controlled person must be given sufficient information about the allegations against him to give effective instructions to the Special Advocate’. This case-note will discuss the challenges facing Special Advocates in control order proceedings and the impact AF may hav…
Strasbourg, the House of Lords or Elected Politicians: Who decides about rights after Re P
In Re P , the House of Lords decided that art 14 of the Adoption (Northern Ireland) Order 1987 which prohibited unmarried couples from being eligible to adopt, violated articles 8 and 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Apart from its significance for adoption law and anti‐discrimination law, Re P is also important in understanding the constitutional role of the courts under the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA). Re P recognizes that if Stra…
Dyzenhaus: The Unity of Public Law
The Role of a Bill of Rights in Reconstructing Northern Ireland
Under the auspices of the Good Friday Agreement of 1998, the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commissionhas recently published a draft Bill of Rights for Northern Ireland. It is argued here that before deciding on the content of a Bill of Rights, serious consideration should be given to the underlying question of the value of a Bill of Rights in a divided society. In addressing this question, this article advances four main arguments: First, a Bill …
The Role of a Bill of Rights in Reconstructing Northern Ireland
Under the auspices of the Good Friday Agreement of 1998, the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commissionhas recently published a draft Bill of Rights for Northern Ireland. It is argued here that before deciding on the content of a Bill of Rights, serious consideration should be given to the underlying question of the value of a Bill of Rights in a divided society. In addressing this question, this article advances four main arguments: First, a Bill …
The lure and the limits of dialogue
Over the last two decades, the metaphor of ‘dialogue’ has become a common way of characterizing the relationship between courts and legislatures under bills of rights. Following an examination of the role of ‘dialogue’ in debates about the Canadian Charter and the UK Human Rights Act, this article will argue that dialogue is a misleading metaphor, which we should abandon in our constitutional discourse. While it may have contributed some potentia…
Cases: Special Advocates, Control Orders and the Right to a Fair Trial
In Secretary of State for the Home Department v AF (No 3), the House of Lords decided that Article 6 ECHR requires a ‘core irreducible minimum’ of procedural fairness such that ‘the controlled person must be given sufficient information about the allegations against him to give effective instructions to the Special Advocate’. This case-note will discuss the challenges facing Special Advocates in control order proceedings and the impact AF may hav…
Dyzenhaus: The Unity of Public Law
The Role of a Bill of Rights in Reconstructing Northern Ireland
Under the auspices of the Good Friday Agreement of 1998, the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commissionhas recently published a draft Bill of Rights for Northern Ireland. It is argued here that before deciding on the content of a Bill of Rights, serious consideration should be given to the underlying question of the value of a Bill of Rights in a divided society. In addressing this question, this article advances four main arguments: First, a Bill …
Strasbourg, the House of Lords or Elected Politicians: Who decides about rights after Re P
In Re P , the House of Lords decided that art 14 of the Adoption (Northern Ireland) Order 1987 which prohibited unmarried couples from being eligible to adopt, violated articles 8 and 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Apart from its significance for adoption law and anti‐discrimination law, Re P is also important in understanding the constitutional role of the courts under the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA). Re P recognizes that if Stra…
Judicial Restraint in the Pursuit of Justice
This article examines the reasons in favour of judicial restraint in human-rights adjudication. It seeks to address the worry that a strategy of restraint may lead judges to refrain from protecting rights, or, at least, to refrain from protecting them to an optimal degree. Beyond this, it considers the way in which the concern to protect the reputation of the courts can give rise to judicial restraint. Finally, it explores the possibility that co…
Cases: Special Advocates, Control Orders and the Right to a Fair Trial
In Secretary of State for the Home Department v AF (No 3), the House of Lords decided that Article 6 ECHR requires a ‘core irreducible minimum’ of procedural fairness such that ‘the controlled person must be given sufficient information about the allegations against him to give effective instructions to the Special Advocate’. This case-note will discuss the challenges facing Special Advocates in control order proceedings and the impact AF may hav…
The lure and the limits of dialogue
Over the last two decades, the metaphor of ‘dialogue’ has become a common way of characterizing the relationship between courts and legislatures under bills of rights. Following an examination of the role of ‘dialogue’ in debates about the Canadian Charter and the UK Human Rights Act, this article will argue that dialogue is a misleading metaphor, which we should abandon in our constitutional discourse. While it may have contributed some potentia…
El papel de los jueces en el marco de una carta de derechos: Una teoría de la contención judicial = The Role of Courts under a Bill of Rights: A Theory of Judicial Restraint
Este trabajo tiene un doble objetivo. La primera parte ofrece una visión de conjunto del sistema de derechos configurado en el Reino Unido mediante la Human Rights Act de 1998, donde se trata de mostrar que, a pesar de haber sido descrito como un ejemplo destacado de la revisión judicial "débil" de constitucionalidad, el sistema británico muestra en realidad muchos rasgos de sutil fortaleza. En la segunda parte se toma como referencia la jurispru…
Underuse of the Override
The power of the legislature to override court rulings on rights—and to legislate ‘notwithstanding’ rights—is one of the most notable and controversial features of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms 1982 and the UK Human Rights Act 1998 . By giving courts the power to protect rights, whilst giving the legislature the last word, the legislative override seems to solve the notorious counter-majoritarian difficulty. Yet in both jurisdiction…
Political science (7 works) · Law (6 works) · Human rights (5 works) · Judicial and Constitutional Studies (5 works) · Law (3 works) · Law and economics (3 works) · Sociology (3 works) · Business (2 works) · Charter (2 works) · Fundamental rights (2 works)