Paradoxes of Ultra-Vires Review
A Critical Review of the PSPP Decision and Its Initial Reception
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21971355 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Mattias Wendel (Kraft Heinz (United States), corresponding author) |
| Year | 2020 |
| Volume | 21 |
| Issue | 5 |
| Pages | 979-994 |
| Publication date | 2020-07-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | German Law Journal (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 2071-8322 • E-ISSN: 2071-8322 |
| Publisher | Cambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1017/glj.2020.62 |
| OpenAlex | W3082872559 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 3 |
This contribution explores paradoxes of ultra vires review with specific regard to the PSPP decision of the German Federal Constitutional Court in the light of the decision’s initial reception. While some of these paradoxes are inherent in the very nature of ultra vires review, others are specific to the PSPP judgment. They relate to the underlying doctrinal and theoretical premises, to key concepts such as proportionality or the scope of judicial review, to the overall context in which the decision is embedded, and even to the community which is addressed and affected by the decision. It is the sad irony that the Federal Constitutional Court, while accusing others of manifestly exceeding their competences, does not sufficiently adhere to its own standards and increasingly risks overstretching the boundaries of its mandate under the Basic Law
Doctrine · German · Irony · Judicial review · Law and economics · Mandate · Political science · Sociology · Ultra vires · Computer Science · European and International Law Studies · Law · Law and Political Science · Philosophy · Public Administration and Political Analysis
| Citations per year | 0.6 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2021 - 2025 (5) |
| Highly cited | No |