Klientu atbalsts: 27018494

Grāmatu iegāde | Jauns profils | Ienākt

E-grāmata: A Crisis of Democratic Accountability: Public Libel Law and the Checking Function of the Press

Randall Stephenson

Formāts: 304 pages
Izdošanas datums: 26-Jul-2018
Izdevniecība: Hart Publishing
ISBN-13: 9781509920822

Citas grāmatas par šo tēmu:

Formāts - EPUB+DRM
Cena: 41,69 €*
* ši ir gala cena, t.i., netiek piemērotas nekādas papildus atlaides
Ielikt grozā
Pievienot vēlmju sarakstam
Šī e-grāmata paredzēta tikai personīgai lietošanai. E-grāmatas nav iespējams atgriezt un nauda par iegādātajām e-grāmatām netiek atmaksāta.

Formāts: 304 pages
Izdošanas datums: 26-Jul-2018
Izdevniecība: Hart Publishing
ISBN-13: 9781509920822

Citas grāmatas par šo tēmu:

DRM restrictions

Kopēšana (kopēt/ievietot):

nav atļauts
Drukāšana:

nav atļauts
Lietošana:

Digitālo tiesību pārvaldība (Digital Rights Management (DRM))
Izdevējs ir piegādājis šo grāmatu šifrētā veidā, kas nozīmē, ka jums ir jāinstalē bezmaksas programmatūra, lai to atbloķētu un lasītu. Lai lasītu šo e-grāmatu, jums ir jāizveido Adobe ID. Vairāk informācijas šeit. E-grāmatu var lasīt un lejupielādēt līdz 6 ierīcēm (vienam lietotājam ar vienu un to pašu Adobe ID).

Nepieciešamā programmatūra
Lai lasītu šo e-grāmatu mobilajā ierīcē (tālrunī vai planšetdatorā), jums būs jāinstalē šī bezmaksas lietotne: PocketBook Reader (iOS / Android)

Lai lejupielādētu un lasītu šo e-grāmatu datorā vai Mac datorā, jums ir nepieciešamid Adobe Digital Editions (šī ir bezmaksas lietotne, kas īpaši izstrādāta e-grāmatām. Tā nav tas pats, kas Adobe Reader, kas, iespējams, jau ir jūsu datorā.)

Jūs nevarat lasīt šo e-grāmatu, izmantojot Amazon Kindle.

This book undertakes a comparative study of the public interest and political speech defences in defamation law, particularly from the perspective of the misuse of democratic free expression justifications. Specifically, it argues that the law and legal approaches taken by leading courts and legislatures in the UK, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and the United States – five common law comparators – are undertheorised, lack adequate criteria for determining the correct form of the defence, and would benefit from a more precise understanding of 'democracy', 'accountability', and 'representation'. The book will be of great interest to scholars of free speech, defamation and public law.

Papildus informācija

An excellent comparative study of the public interest and political speech defences in defamation law, particularly from the perspective of the misuse of democratic free expression justifications, in the UK, Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the United States.

Table of Cases

Table of Statutes

xiii

Tables and Figures

Introduction

(8)

Part A Introduction to the Problem of Public Libel Law

Overview of Part A

(2)

1 Balancing Freedom of Expression and Reputation in Constitutional Context

(26)

I Defamation's Moving Target: Balancing Free Expression and Reputation

(9)

A Constituent Elements

(1)

B Defences

(2)

C Publications to the `World at Large'

(2)

D Politicians and Public Libels---The Resonance of Radical Whig Ideology

(2)

E Liberalising Media Defamation Defences

(1)

II Overview of Public Libel Doctrine

(8)

A United States

(1)

B Australia

(1)

C New Zealand

(1)

D United Kingdom

(3)

E Canada

(1)

III Continuum of Doctrinal Solutions

(1)

IV Public Libel Law's Theory-Doctrine Rift

(7)

A Universal Rejection of the `Actual Malice' Rule

(4)

B Necessity for Expanded Comparative Law Framework

(3)

V
Chapter Conclusion

(1)

2 Methodological Barriers to Democratic Theorising

(24)

I Overview

(1)

II Methodological Barrier I

(3)

A Freedom of Expression's Incomplete `Core'

(3)

III Democratic Theorising in Public Libel Jurisprudence

(11)

A Meiklejohn's `Self-Governance' Rationale

(5)

B Blasi's `Checking Value' of the Press

(6)

IV Methodological Barrier II

(7)

A Necessity for `Multi-Valued' Theorising

(4)

B Structural Institutionalism, Categoricalism, and Ad Hoc Balancing

(3)

V Moving Forward

(2)

Part B Undertheorising Democratic Accountability: Comparative Law Analysis of Public Libel Doctrine

Overview of Part B

(2)

3 Indeterminate Balancing in Public Libel Doctrine: Generic Rules and `Implied Rights'

(28)

I United States

(13)

A Defamation Plaintiffs, Generic Rules, and Democratic Theory

(12)

B Conclusion

(1)

II Australia

(13)

A Implied Rights: Disavowing Free Speech Theory

(4)

B Defamation and Implied Freedoms

(4)

C Methodological Crisis in the High Court

(4)

D Conclusion

(1)

III
Chapter Conclusion

(2)

4 Overlooking the Checking Function of the Press

(28)

I Overview

(1)

II Strasbourg Jurisprudence

(7)

A Press Freedom and Political Expression under the European Convention

(2)

B `Responsible Journalism' and Judicial Censure

(4)

C Conclusion

(1)

III United Kingdom

(8)

A Of `Missing Rationales and Principles'

(8)

B Conclusion

106

(1)

IV New Zealand

106

(11)

A Bias against the Press in the Court of Appeal

106

(3)

B `Drawing the Line': Theoretical Disjunctions and Public Libel Reform

109

(3)

C Enlarging the Scope of Qualified Privilege

112

(4)

D Conclusion

116

(1)

V
Chapter Conclusion

117

(2)

5 Conflating Meiklejohnian Theory and the Checking Function of the Press

119

(22)

I Overview

119

(1)

II United Kingdom

119

(6)

A Reciprocity Obligations and Meiklejohnian Theory

120

(2)

B Undertheorising in the UK Parliament

122

(3)

C Conclusion

125

(1)

III Canada

125

(13)

A A `Quasi-Constitutional' Press: The Checking Function before the Charter

126

(2)

B Post-Charter Methodological Errors

128

(4)

C `Rebalancing' Defamation Law without the Checking Function

132

(5)

D Conclusion

137

(1)

IV
Chapter Conclusion

138

(3)

Part C Reasserting Democratic Accountability

Overview of Part C

141

(4)

6 Distinguishing the Checking Function from Meiklejohnian Theory: Lessons from Public Accountability and Neo-Republicanism

145

(22)

I Confronting a Conceptual Stalemate: `Representation' and `Accountability'

145

(5)

II Public Accountability Scholarship

150

(11)

A Preliminary Observations

150

(2)

B Accountability's `Minimal Conceptual Consensus'

152

(1)

C Accountability Mechanisms, Arrangements, and Regimes

153

(6)

D Assessing Accountability

159

(2)

III Neo-Republicanism: A Return to Institutional Design

161

(5)

A Liberty as `Non-Domination'

161

(1)

B `Gas-and-Water-Works' Institutional Design

162

(4)

IV
Chapter Conclusion

166

(1)

7 A Revised Analytical Framework: Accountability Dysfunctions, Public Libel Doctrine, and the Institutional Press

167

(26)

I Overview

167

(1)

II Accountability Dysfunctions

168

(5)

A A `Systems Approach' to Accountability

168

(2)

B Accountability Deficits

170

(1)

C Accountability Overloads

171

(2)

III The Institutional Press as a Horizontal Accountability Mechanism

173

(12)

A Preliminary Observations

173

(1)

B Watchdog or Guard Dog?

174

(3)

C Empirical Evidence

177

(7)

D Conclusion

184

(1)

IV Public Libel Doctrine: Balancing Reputation and Freedom of Expression in Contemporary Democracies

185

(6)

A Moving Toward a Revised Analytical Framework

185

(1)

B Primary Mechanisms: Constitutional Structure

186

(1)

C Secondary Mechanisms: Dynamic Variables

186

(1)

D Collibration

186

(2)

E Public Libel Doctrine: Legal Restrictions on the Press

188

(3)

V
Chapter Conclusion

191

(2)

Part D Restoring Democratic Accountability

Overview of Part D

193

(2)

8 Assessing Britain's Political Accountability Profile

195

(26)

I Selecting a Law Reform Candidate

195

(3)

II Britain's Primary Accountability Mechanisms

198

(15)

A Parliamentary/Presidential Structure

199

(3)

B Federal/Unitary Structure

202

(2)

C Electoral System

204

(2)

D Legislative Scrutiny

206

(5)

E Judicial Review

211

(2)

F Conclusion on Primary Accountability Mechanisms

213

(1)

III Britain's Secondary Accountability Mechanisms

213

(7)

A Governmental Auditors

213

(3)

B Independent Regulators

216

(2)

C Direct Public Access

218

(2)

D Conclusion on Secondary Accountability Mechanisms

220

(1)

IV
Chapter Conclusion

220

(1)

9 Reinstating the Checking Function in Britain's Constitutional Context

221

(18)

I Law Reform Recommendations

221

(7)

A Rationale for Britain's Public Libel Doctrine

221

(2)

B Specific Law Reform Proposals

223

(5)

II Discussion

228

(9)

A Methodological Constraints and Further Research

228

(2)

B Comparative Law Reflections

230

(6)

C Institutional Competence

236

(1)

III
Chapter Conclusion

237

(2)

Conclusion---Prospective Challenges to Public Libel Law Reform

239

(4)

Index

243

Randall Stephenson is a scholar of defamation law and public law. He completed his DPhil in law at the University of Oxford in 2017. Before attending Oxford, he studied first amendment jurisprudence at Columbia University (LLM) and practiced litigation at Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP in Toronto, Canada.

Biežāk uzdotie jautājumi par e-grāmatām

Permanent link: https://www.kriso.lv/db/97815099208226e.html

Keywords:

Libel and slander

E-grāmata: A Crisis of Democratic Accountability: Public Libel Law and the Checking Function of the Press

DRM restrictions

Kopēšana (kopēt/ievietot):

Drukāšana:

Lietošana:

Papildus informācija

Konts un iestatījumi

Meklēšana

Meklēt datubāzē

Refine By

Tēmas Ebook Subjects

Izvēlieties iepirkumu grozu