The Constitutional Courts of Small Jurisdictions identifies features and challenges common to the constitutional courts of small state jurisdictions in Europe. The constitutional courts of the following small state jurisdictions are explored: Andorra, Cyprus, Estonia, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Malta, Monaco, Montenegro, and San Marino. For each country’s constitutional court, the following matters are examined: the history of the court; its composition; its standing and the types of proceedings; jurisdiction of the court; procedural steps and rules; the nature and effect of the decisions rendered; relations with other courts (CJEU, ECHR, etc.); and current issues and future developments. The book concludes by identifying some common features and challenges that constitutional courts of small states are confronted with, formulating recommendations for other small state jurisdictions across the world. This book will be of great interest and use to practitioners and scholars working in and researching constitutional law in general, and constitutional courts in particular. It will be invaluable for those dealing with small states, as it pays attention to an often forgotten - but important - aspect of the rule of law, and thus also of democracy.

The book examines whether small jurisdictions (states) are confronted with specific issues providing social security and how to deal with these issues. How is social security law impacted by the smallness of the jurisdiction? First, the author examines the key concepts ‘small jurisdiction’ and ‘social security’ as he understands them in the present research. He then pays some attention to the relation between social security and social security law and subsequently makes an excursion to explore the notion of legal transplants. In the second part, the author first examines the main features characterizing small states according to the general literature on small states, focusing on features which may be relevant to social security. He also includes an overview of the (limited) literature dealing with the specific social security issues small jurisdictions have to deal with. In other words, the second part provides the reader with the status quaestionis. In the third part, the author takes a look at the social security systems of 20 selected small jurisdictions. He does so according to a uniform scheme, in order to facilitate their comparison. These 20 case studies allow him in a next part to test the correctness of the statements made in Part 2. In the fourth part, he compares the social security systems of the 20 small jurisdictions. He draws conclusions as to the main question, but also to test the validity of the current literature on the topic as described in Part 2. Special attention goes to the use of legal transplants for the definition of the personal scope of social security arrangements. In the concluding part of the book, the author formulates some suggestions for the benefit of the social security systems of the small jurisdictions, based on his research.

Constitutional review has become an essential feature of modern liberal democratic constitutionalism. In particular, constitutional review in the context of rights litigation has proved to be most challenging for the courts. By offering in-depth analyses on changes affecting constitutional design and constitutional adjudication, while also engaging with general theories of comparative constitutionalism, this book seeks to provide a heightened understanding of the constitutional and political responses to the issue of adaptability and endurance of rights-based constitutional review. These original contributions, written by an array of distinguished experts and illustrated by the most up-to-date case law, cover Australia, Belgium, Finland, France, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Spain, the United Kingdom and the United States, and include constitutional systems that are not commonly studied in comparative constitutional studies. Providing structured analyses, the editors combine studies of common law and civil law jurisdictions, centralized and decentralized systems of constitutional review, and large and small jurisdictions. This multi-jurisdictional study will appeal to members of the judiciary, policymakers and practitioners looking for valuable insights into the case law of a range of constitutional and supreme courts in this rapidly expanding field of constitutional adjudication. It also serves as an excellent resource for academics, scholars and advanced students in the fields of law, human rights and political science.

Comparing constitutions allows us to consider the similarities and differences in forms of government as well as the normative philosophies behind constitutional choices. The objective behind this Companion is to present the reader with a succinct yet wide-ranging companion to a modern comparative constitutional law course.