IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sja/journl/v5y2016i1p207-213.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Role Of Dissenting And Concurring Opinions In The Constitutional Jurisdiction

Author

Listed:
  • Marieta Safta

    (Titu Maiorescu University of Bucharest, Faculty of Law)

Abstract

The Judges’ possibility to submit dissenting / concurring opinions is disputed as arguments are brought both for and against it in the context of the obligation to ensure the secrecy of deliberations. This study, bringing landmarks of the European Constitutional Courts’ legislation and case-law on the subject, demonstrates the role of the dissenting and concurring opinions in the development of the law, emphasizing the idea of balance for their formulation and grounds.

Suggested Citation

  • Marieta Safta, 2016. "The Role Of Dissenting And Concurring Opinions In The Constitutional Jurisdiction," Perspectives of Law and Public Administration, Societatea de Stiinte Juridice si Administrative (Society of Juridical and Administrative Sciences), vol. 5(1), pages 207-213, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:sja:journl:v:5:y:2016:i:1:p:207-213
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://businesslawconference.ro/revista/articole/an5nr1/Art.%2028%20Marieta%20Safta.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Florentina Camelia Stoica, 2016. "Considerations regarding the constitutional obligation determining the financing source for budgetary expenditures," Juridical Tribune - Review of Comparative and International Law, Bucharest Academy of Economic Studies, vol. 6(2), pages 156-164, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    dissenting opinions; concurring opinions; constitutional review; independence of judge.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • K10 - Law and Economics - - Basic Areas of Law - - - General (Constitutional Law)
    • K41 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior - - - Litigation Process

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sja:journl:v:5:y:2016:i:1:p:207-213. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catalin-Silviu Sararu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ssjarea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.