Von dem Buch Judicial Review of Legislation: A Comparative Study of the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and South Africa (Ius Gentium: Comparative Perspectives on Law and Justice) haben wir 3 gleiche oder sehr ähnliche Ausgaben identifiziert!
Falls Sie nur an einem bestimmten Exempar interessiert sind, können Sie aus der folgenden Liste jenes wählen, an dem Sie interessiert sind:
100%: Gerhard van der Schyff: Judicial Review of Legislation: A Comparative Study of the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and South Africa (Ius Gentium: Comparative Perspectives on Law and Justice) (ISBN: 9789400723993) 2011, Springer-Verlag, 2010. Ausgabe, in Englisch, Taschenbuch.Nur diese Ausgabe anzeigen…
100%: Gerhard van der Schyff: Judicial Review of Legislation: A Comparative Study of the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and South Africa (Ius Gentium: Comparative Perspectives on Law and Justice) (ISBN: 9789048190027) Springer, 2010. Ausgabe, in Englisch, auch als eBook.Nur diese Ausgabe anzeigen…
100%: Gerhard van der Schyff: Judicial Review of Legislation: A Comparative Study of the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and South Africa (Ius Gentium: Comparative Perspectives on Law and Justice) (ISBN: 9789048190010) 2010, Springer, 2010. Ausgabe, in Englisch, Broschiert.Nur diese Ausgabe anzeigen…
Judicial Review of Legislation: A Comparative Study of the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and South Africa (Ius Gentium: Comparative Perspectives on Law and Justice)
14 Angebote vergleichen
| Preise | Okt. 15 | Nov. 15 | Jan. 24 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Schnitt | € 58,84 | € 48,20 | € 136,53 |
| Nachfrage |
1
Judicial Review of Legislation, A Comparative Study of the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and South Africa (2010)
NL HC NWISBN: 9789048190010 bzw. 9048190010, in Holländisch, Springer, gebundenes Buch, neu.
Lieferung aus: Niederlande, Vermoedelijk 4-6 weken.
bol.com.
Constitutionalism is the permanent quest to control state power, of which the judicial review of legislation is a prime example. Although the judicial review of legislation is increasingly common in modern societies, it is not a finished project. This device still raises questions as to whether judicial review is justified, and how it may be structured. Yet, judicial review´s justification and its scope are seldom addressed in the same study, thereby making for an inconvenient divorce of these t... Constitutionalism is the permanent quest to control state power, of which the judicial review of legislation is a prime example. Although the judicial review of legislation is increasingly common in modern societies, it is not a finished project. This device still raises questions as to whether judicial review is justified, and how it may be structured. Yet, judicial review´s justification and its scope are seldom addressed in the same study, thereby making for an inconvenient divorce of these two related avenues of study. To narrow the divide, the object of this work is quite straightforward. Namely, is the idea of judicial review defensible, and what influences its design and scope? This book addresses these matters by comparing the judicial review of legislation in the United Kingdom (the Human Rights Act of 1998), the Netherlands (the Halsema Proposal of 2002) and the Constitution of South Africa of 1996. These systems present valuable material to study the issues raised by judicial review. The Netherlands is of particular interest as its Constitution still prohibits the constitutional review of acts of parliament, while allowing treaty review of such acts. The Halsema Proposal wants to even out this difference by allowing the courts also to apply constitutional norms to legislation and not only to international norms. The Human Rights Act and the South African Constitution also present interesting questions that will make their study worthwhile. One can think of the issue of dialogue between the legislature and the judiciary. This topic enjoys increased attention in the United Kingdom but is somewhat underexplored in South African thought on judicial review. These and similar issues are studied in each of the three systems, to not only gain a better understanding of the systems as such, but also of judicial review in general.Taal: Engels;Afmetingen: 14x234x156 mm;Gewicht: 1,15 kg;Verschijningsdatum: juli 2010;ISBN10: 9048190010;ISBN13: 9789048190010; Engelstalig | Hardcover | 2010.
bol.com.
Constitutionalism is the permanent quest to control state power, of which the judicial review of legislation is a prime example. Although the judicial review of legislation is increasingly common in modern societies, it is not a finished project. This device still raises questions as to whether judicial review is justified, and how it may be structured. Yet, judicial review´s justification and its scope are seldom addressed in the same study, thereby making for an inconvenient divorce of these t... Constitutionalism is the permanent quest to control state power, of which the judicial review of legislation is a prime example. Although the judicial review of legislation is increasingly common in modern societies, it is not a finished project. This device still raises questions as to whether judicial review is justified, and how it may be structured. Yet, judicial review´s justification and its scope are seldom addressed in the same study, thereby making for an inconvenient divorce of these two related avenues of study. To narrow the divide, the object of this work is quite straightforward. Namely, is the idea of judicial review defensible, and what influences its design and scope? This book addresses these matters by comparing the judicial review of legislation in the United Kingdom (the Human Rights Act of 1998), the Netherlands (the Halsema Proposal of 2002) and the Constitution of South Africa of 1996. These systems present valuable material to study the issues raised by judicial review. The Netherlands is of particular interest as its Constitution still prohibits the constitutional review of acts of parliament, while allowing treaty review of such acts. The Halsema Proposal wants to even out this difference by allowing the courts also to apply constitutional norms to legislation and not only to international norms. The Human Rights Act and the South African Constitution also present interesting questions that will make their study worthwhile. One can think of the issue of dialogue between the legislature and the judiciary. This topic enjoys increased attention in the United Kingdom but is somewhat underexplored in South African thought on judicial review. These and similar issues are studied in each of the three systems, to not only gain a better understanding of the systems as such, but also of judicial review in general.Taal: Engels;Afmetingen: 14x234x156 mm;Gewicht: 1,15 kg;Verschijningsdatum: juli 2010;ISBN10: 9048190010;ISBN13: 9789048190010; Engelstalig | Hardcover | 2010.
2
Judicial Review of Legislation
NL NWISBN: 9789400723993 bzw. 9400723997, in Holländisch, neu.
Lieferung aus: Schweiz, zzgl. Versandkosten, Versandfertig innert 6 - 9 Tagen.
This book compares the judicial review of legislation in the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and the South African constitution of 1996, probing the justification and scope of review, to reveal the influences and practical matters of design and scope. Constitutionalism is the permanent quest to control state power, of which the judicial review of legislation is a prime example. Although the judicial review of legislation is increasingly common in modern societies, it is not a finished project. This device still raises questions as to whether judicial review is justified, and how it may be structured. Yet, judicial reviews justification and its scope are seldom addressed in the same study, thereby making for an inconvenient divorce of these two related avenues of study. To narrow the divide, the object of this work is quite straightforward. Namely, is the idea of judicial review defensible, and what influences its design and scope? This book addresses these matters by comparing the judicial review of legislation in the United Kingdom (the Human Rights Act of 1998), the Netherlands (the Halsema Proposal of 2002) and the Constitution of South Africa of 1996. These systems present valuable material to study the issues raised by judicial review. The Netherlands is of particular interest as its Constitution still prohibits the constitutional review of acts of parliament, while allowing treaty review of such acts. The Halsema Proposal wants to even out this difference by allowing the courts also to apply constitutional norms to legislation and not only to international norms. The Human Rights Act and the South African Constitution also present interesting questions that will make their study worthwhile. One can think of the issue of dialogue between the legislature and the judiciary. This topic enjoys increased attention in the United Kingdom but is somewhat underexplored in South African thought on judicial review. These and similar issues are studied in each of the three systems, to not only gain a better understanding of the systems as such, but also of judicial review in general.
This book compares the judicial review of legislation in the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and the South African constitution of 1996, probing the justification and scope of review, to reveal the influences and practical matters of design and scope. Constitutionalism is the permanent quest to control state power, of which the judicial review of legislation is a prime example. Although the judicial review of legislation is increasingly common in modern societies, it is not a finished project. This device still raises questions as to whether judicial review is justified, and how it may be structured. Yet, judicial reviews justification and its scope are seldom addressed in the same study, thereby making for an inconvenient divorce of these two related avenues of study. To narrow the divide, the object of this work is quite straightforward. Namely, is the idea of judicial review defensible, and what influences its design and scope? This book addresses these matters by comparing the judicial review of legislation in the United Kingdom (the Human Rights Act of 1998), the Netherlands (the Halsema Proposal of 2002) and the Constitution of South Africa of 1996. These systems present valuable material to study the issues raised by judicial review. The Netherlands is of particular interest as its Constitution still prohibits the constitutional review of acts of parliament, while allowing treaty review of such acts. The Halsema Proposal wants to even out this difference by allowing the courts also to apply constitutional norms to legislation and not only to international norms. The Human Rights Act and the South African Constitution also present interesting questions that will make their study worthwhile. One can think of the issue of dialogue between the legislature and the judiciary. This topic enjoys increased attention in the United Kingdom but is somewhat underexplored in South African thought on judicial review. These and similar issues are studied in each of the three systems, to not only gain a better understanding of the systems as such, but also of judicial review in general.
3
Judicial Review of Legislation: A Comparative Study of the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and South Africa (Ius Gentium: Comparative Perspectives on Law and Justice) (2011)
EN PB USISBN: 9789400723993 bzw. 9400723997, in Englisch, 220 Seiten, 2010. Ausgabe, Springer, Taschenbuch, gebraucht.
Lieferung aus: Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika, Usually ships in 1-2 business days.
Von Händler/Antiquariat, SuperBookDeals--.
Constitutionalism is the permanent quest to control state power, of which the judicial review of legislation is a prime example. Although the judicial review of legislation is increasingly common in modern societies, it is not a finished project. This device still raises questions as to whether judicial review is justified, and how it may be structured. Yet, judicial review's justification and its scope are seldom addressed in the same study, thereby making for an inconvenient divorce of these two related avenues of study. To narrow the divide, the object of this work is quite straightforward. Namely, is the idea of judicial review defensible, and what influences its design and scope? This book addresses these matters by comparing the judicial review of legislation in the United Kingdom (the Human Rights Act of 1998), the Netherlands (the Halsema Proposal of 2002) and the Constitution of South Africa of 1996. These systems present valuable material to study the issues raised by judicial review. The Netherlands is of particular interest as its Constitution still prohibits the constitutional review of acts of parliament, while allowing treaty review of such acts. The Halsema Proposal wants to even out this difference by allowing the courts also to apply constitutional norms to legislation and not only to international norms. The Human Rights Act and the South African Constitution also present interesting questions that will make their study worthwhile. One can think of the issue of dialogue between the legislature and the judiciary. This topic enjoys increased attention in the United Kingdom but is somewhat underexplored in South African thought on judicial review. These and similar issues are studied in each of the three systems, to not only gain a better understanding of the systems as such, but also of judicial review in general. Paperback, Ausgabe: 2010, Label: Springer, Springer, Produktgruppe: Book, Publiziert: 2011-07-26, Studio: Springer, Verkaufsrang: 4505650.
Von Händler/Antiquariat, SuperBookDeals--.
Constitutionalism is the permanent quest to control state power, of which the judicial review of legislation is a prime example. Although the judicial review of legislation is increasingly common in modern societies, it is not a finished project. This device still raises questions as to whether judicial review is justified, and how it may be structured. Yet, judicial review's justification and its scope are seldom addressed in the same study, thereby making for an inconvenient divorce of these two related avenues of study. To narrow the divide, the object of this work is quite straightforward. Namely, is the idea of judicial review defensible, and what influences its design and scope? This book addresses these matters by comparing the judicial review of legislation in the United Kingdom (the Human Rights Act of 1998), the Netherlands (the Halsema Proposal of 2002) and the Constitution of South Africa of 1996. These systems present valuable material to study the issues raised by judicial review. The Netherlands is of particular interest as its Constitution still prohibits the constitutional review of acts of parliament, while allowing treaty review of such acts. The Halsema Proposal wants to even out this difference by allowing the courts also to apply constitutional norms to legislation and not only to international norms. The Human Rights Act and the South African Constitution also present interesting questions that will make their study worthwhile. One can think of the issue of dialogue between the legislature and the judiciary. This topic enjoys increased attention in the United Kingdom but is somewhat underexplored in South African thought on judicial review. These and similar issues are studied in each of the three systems, to not only gain a better understanding of the systems as such, but also of judicial review in general. Paperback, Ausgabe: 2010, Label: Springer, Springer, Produktgruppe: Book, Publiziert: 2011-07-26, Studio: Springer, Verkaufsrang: 4505650.
4
Judicial Review of Legislation: A Comparative Study of the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and South Africa (Ius Gentium: Comparative Perspectives on Law and Justice) (2010)
EN HC USISBN: 9789048190010 bzw. 9048190010, in Englisch, 244 Seiten, 2010. Ausgabe, Springer, gebundenes Buch, gebraucht.
Lieferung aus: Vereinigtes Königreich Großbritannien und Nordirland, Usually dispatched within 1-2 business days, exclusief verzendkosten (indien geleverd).
Von Händler/Antiquariat, Nearfine.
Constitutionalism is the permanent quest to control state power, of which the judicial review of legislation is a prime example. Although the judicial review of legislation is increasingly common in modern societies, it is not a finished project. This device still raises questions as to whether judicial review is justified, and how it may be structured. Yet, judicial review's justification and its scope are seldom addressed in the same study, thereby making for an inconvenient divorce of these two related avenues of study. To narrow the divide, the object of this work is quite straightforward. Namely, is the idea of judicial review defensible, and what influences its design and scope? This book addresses these matters by comparing the judicial review of legislation in the United Kingdom (the Human Rights Act of 1998), the Netherlands (the Halsema Proposal of 2002) and the Constitution of South Africa of 1996. These systems present valuable material to study the issues raised by judicial review. The Netherlands is of particular interest as its Constitution still prohibits the constitutional review of acts of parliament, while allowing treaty review of such acts. The Halsema Proposal wants to even out this difference by allowing the courts also to apply constitutional norms to legislation and not only to international norms. The Human Rights Act and the South African Constitution also present interesting questions that will make their study worthwhile. One can think of the issue of dialogue between the legislature and the judiciary. This topic enjoys increased attention in the United Kingdom but is somewhat underexplored in South African thought on judicial review. These and similar issues are studied in each of the three systems, to not only gain a better understanding of the systems as such, but also of judicial review in general. Hardcover, Editie: 2010, Label: Springer, Springer, Productgroep: Book, Gepubliceerd: 2010-07-05, Releasedatum: 2010-07-05, Studio: Springer, Verkoop rang: 4138568.
Von Händler/Antiquariat, Nearfine.
Constitutionalism is the permanent quest to control state power, of which the judicial review of legislation is a prime example. Although the judicial review of legislation is increasingly common in modern societies, it is not a finished project. This device still raises questions as to whether judicial review is justified, and how it may be structured. Yet, judicial review's justification and its scope are seldom addressed in the same study, thereby making for an inconvenient divorce of these two related avenues of study. To narrow the divide, the object of this work is quite straightforward. Namely, is the idea of judicial review defensible, and what influences its design and scope? This book addresses these matters by comparing the judicial review of legislation in the United Kingdom (the Human Rights Act of 1998), the Netherlands (the Halsema Proposal of 2002) and the Constitution of South Africa of 1996. These systems present valuable material to study the issues raised by judicial review. The Netherlands is of particular interest as its Constitution still prohibits the constitutional review of acts of parliament, while allowing treaty review of such acts. The Halsema Proposal wants to even out this difference by allowing the courts also to apply constitutional norms to legislation and not only to international norms. The Human Rights Act and the South African Constitution also present interesting questions that will make their study worthwhile. One can think of the issue of dialogue between the legislature and the judiciary. This topic enjoys increased attention in the United Kingdom but is somewhat underexplored in South African thought on judicial review. These and similar issues are studied in each of the three systems, to not only gain a better understanding of the systems as such, but also of judicial review in general. Hardcover, Editie: 2010, Label: Springer, Springer, Productgroep: Book, Gepubliceerd: 2010-07-05, Releasedatum: 2010-07-05, Studio: Springer, Verkoop rang: 4138568.
5
Judicial Review of Legislation: A Comparative Study of the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and South Africa (Ius Gentium: Comparative Perspectives on Law and Justice) (2010)
EN HC NWISBN: 9789048190010 bzw. 9048190010, in Englisch, 244 Seiten, 2010. Ausgabe, Springer, gebundenes Buch, neu.
Lieferung aus: Vereinigtes Königreich Großbritannien und Nordirland, Usually dispatched within 24 hours.
Von Händler/Antiquariat, Amazon.co.uk.
Constitutionalism is the permanent quest to control state power, of which the judicial review of legislation is a prime example. Although the judicial review of legislation is increasingly common in modern societies, it is not a finished project. This device still raises questions as to whether judicial review is justified, and how it may be structured. Yet, judicial review's justification and its scope are seldom addressed in the same study, thereby making for an inconvenient divorce of these two related avenues of study. To narrow the divide, the object of this work is quite straightforward. Namely, is the idea of judicial review defensible, and what influences its design and scope? This book addresses these matters by comparing the judicial review of legislation in the United Kingdom (the Human Rights Act of 1998), the Netherlands (the Halsema Proposal of 2002) and the Constitution of South Africa of 1996. These systems present valuable material to study the issues raised by judicial review. The Netherlands is of particular interest as its Constitution still prohibits the constitutional review of acts of parliament, while allowing treaty review of such acts. The Halsema Proposal wants to even out this difference by allowing the courts also to apply constitutional norms to legislation and not only to international norms. The Human Rights Act and the South African Constitution also present interesting questions that will make their study worthwhile. One can think of the issue of dialogue between the legislature and the judiciary. This topic enjoys increased attention in the United Kingdom but is somewhat underexplored in South African thought on judicial review. These and similar issues are studied in each of the three systems, to not only gain a better understanding of the systems as such, but also of judicial review in general. Hardcover, Editie: 2010, Label: Springer, Springer, Productgroep: Book, Gepubliceerd: 2010-07-05, Releasedatum: 2010-07-05, Studio: Springer, Verkoop rang: 4138568.
Von Händler/Antiquariat, Amazon.co.uk.
Constitutionalism is the permanent quest to control state power, of which the judicial review of legislation is a prime example. Although the judicial review of legislation is increasingly common in modern societies, it is not a finished project. This device still raises questions as to whether judicial review is justified, and how it may be structured. Yet, judicial review's justification and its scope are seldom addressed in the same study, thereby making for an inconvenient divorce of these two related avenues of study. To narrow the divide, the object of this work is quite straightforward. Namely, is the idea of judicial review defensible, and what influences its design and scope? This book addresses these matters by comparing the judicial review of legislation in the United Kingdom (the Human Rights Act of 1998), the Netherlands (the Halsema Proposal of 2002) and the Constitution of South Africa of 1996. These systems present valuable material to study the issues raised by judicial review. The Netherlands is of particular interest as its Constitution still prohibits the constitutional review of acts of parliament, while allowing treaty review of such acts. The Halsema Proposal wants to even out this difference by allowing the courts also to apply constitutional norms to legislation and not only to international norms. The Human Rights Act and the South African Constitution also present interesting questions that will make their study worthwhile. One can think of the issue of dialogue between the legislature and the judiciary. This topic enjoys increased attention in the United Kingdom but is somewhat underexplored in South African thought on judicial review. These and similar issues are studied in each of the three systems, to not only gain a better understanding of the systems as such, but also of judicial review in general. Hardcover, Editie: 2010, Label: Springer, Springer, Productgroep: Book, Gepubliceerd: 2010-07-05, Releasedatum: 2010-07-05, Studio: Springer, Verkoop rang: 4138568.
6
Judicial Review of Legislation: A Comparative Study of the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and South Africa (Ius Gentium: Comparative Perspectives on Law and Justice) (2010)
EN NW EB DLISBN: 9789048190027 bzw. 9048190029, in Englisch, 244 Seiten, 2010. Ausgabe, Springer, neu, E-Book, elektronischer Download.
Lieferung aus: Vereinigtes Königreich Großbritannien und Nordirland, ebook downloaden, Gratis verzending.
Constitutionalism is the permanent quest to control state power, of which the judicial review of legislation is a prime example. Although the judicial review of legislation is increasingly common in modern societies, it is not a finished project. This device still raises questions as to whether judicial review is justified, and how it may be structured. Yet, judicial review’s justification and its scope are seldom addressed in the same study, thereby making for an inconvenient divorce of these two related avenues of study. To narrow the divide, the object of this work is quite straightforward. Namely, is the idea of judicial review defensible, and what influences its design and scope? This book addresses these matters by comparing the judicial review of legislation in the United Kingdom (the Human Rights Act of 1998), the Netherlands (the Halsema Proposal of 2002) and the Constitution of South Africa of 1996. These systems present valuable material to study the issues raised by judicial review. The Netherlands is of particular interest as its Constitution still prohibits the constitutional review of acts of parliament, while allowing treaty review of such acts. The Halsema Proposal wants to even out this difference by allowing the courts also to apply constitutional norms to legislation and not only to international norms. The Human Rights Act and the South African Constitution also present interesting questions that will make their study worthwhile. One can think of the issue of dialogue between the legislature and the judiciary. This topic enjoys increased attention in the United Kingdom but is somewhat underexplored in South African thought on judicial review. These and similar issues are studied in each of the three systems, to not only gain a better understanding of the systems as such, but also of judicial review in general. Kindle Edition, Editie: 2010, Indeling: Kindle eBook, Label: Springer, Springer, Productgroep: eBooks, Gepubliceerd: 2010-06-16, Releasedatum: 2010-06-16, Studio: Springer.
Constitutionalism is the permanent quest to control state power, of which the judicial review of legislation is a prime example. Although the judicial review of legislation is increasingly common in modern societies, it is not a finished project. This device still raises questions as to whether judicial review is justified, and how it may be structured. Yet, judicial review’s justification and its scope are seldom addressed in the same study, thereby making for an inconvenient divorce of these two related avenues of study. To narrow the divide, the object of this work is quite straightforward. Namely, is the idea of judicial review defensible, and what influences its design and scope? This book addresses these matters by comparing the judicial review of legislation in the United Kingdom (the Human Rights Act of 1998), the Netherlands (the Halsema Proposal of 2002) and the Constitution of South Africa of 1996. These systems present valuable material to study the issues raised by judicial review. The Netherlands is of particular interest as its Constitution still prohibits the constitutional review of acts of parliament, while allowing treaty review of such acts. The Halsema Proposal wants to even out this difference by allowing the courts also to apply constitutional norms to legislation and not only to international norms. The Human Rights Act and the South African Constitution also present interesting questions that will make their study worthwhile. One can think of the issue of dialogue between the legislature and the judiciary. This topic enjoys increased attention in the United Kingdom but is somewhat underexplored in South African thought on judicial review. These and similar issues are studied in each of the three systems, to not only gain a better understanding of the systems as such, but also of judicial review in general. Kindle Edition, Editie: 2010, Indeling: Kindle eBook, Label: Springer, Springer, Productgroep: eBooks, Gepubliceerd: 2010-06-16, Releasedatum: 2010-06-16, Studio: Springer.
7
Judicial Review of Legislation, A Comparative Study of the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and South Africa (2015)
NL NW EBISBN: 9789048190027 bzw. 9048190029, in Holländisch, Springer, neu, E-Book.
Lieferung aus: Niederlande, Direct beschikbaar.
bol.com.
Productinformatie:Taal: Engels;Formaat: ePub met kopieerbeveiliging (DRM) van Adobe;Kopieerrechten: Het kopiëren van (delen van) de pagina's is niet toegestaan ;Geschikt voor: Alle e-readers te koop bij bol.com (of compatible met Adobe DRM). Telefoons/tablets met Google Android (1.6 of hoger) voorzien van bol.com boekenbol app. PC en Mac met Adobe reader software;ISBN10: 9048190029;ISBN13: 9789048190027; Engels | Ebook | 2015.
bol.com.
Productinformatie:Taal: Engels;Formaat: ePub met kopieerbeveiliging (DRM) van Adobe;Kopieerrechten: Het kopiëren van (delen van) de pagina's is niet toegestaan ;Geschikt voor: Alle e-readers te koop bij bol.com (of compatible met Adobe DRM). Telefoons/tablets met Google Android (1.6 of hoger) voorzien van bol.com boekenbol app. PC en Mac met Adobe reader software;ISBN10: 9048190029;ISBN13: 9789048190027; Engels | Ebook | 2015.
8
Symbolbild
Judicial Review of Legislation: A Comparative Study of the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and South Africa (Ius Gentium: Comparative Perspectives on Law and Justice, 5)
~EN HC USISBN: 9789048190010 bzw. 9048190010, vermutlich in Englisch, gebundenes Buch, gebraucht, guter Zustand.
Lieferung aus: Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika, Versandkosten nach: DEU.
Von Händler/Antiquariat, Bonita.
hardcover. Good. Access codes and supplements are not guaranteed with used items. May be an ex-library book.
Von Händler/Antiquariat, Bonita.
hardcover. Good. Access codes and supplements are not guaranteed with used items. May be an ex-library book.
9
Symbolbild
Judicial Review of Legislation: A Comparative Study of the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and South Africa (Ius Gentium: Comparative Perspectives on Law and Justice, 5)
~EN PB USISBN: 9789400723993 bzw. 9400723997, vermutlich in Englisch, Taschenbuch, gebraucht, guter Zustand.
Lieferung aus: Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika, Versandkosten nach: DEU.
Von Händler/Antiquariat, Bonita.
paperback. Good. Access codes and supplements are not guaranteed with used items. May be an ex-library book.
Von Händler/Antiquariat, Bonita.
paperback. Good. Access codes and supplements are not guaranteed with used items. May be an ex-library book.
10
Symbolbild
Judicial Review of Legislation: A Comparative Study of the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and South Africa (2011)
~EN PB NW RPISBN: 9789400723993 bzw. 9400723997, vermutlich in Englisch, Springer Verlag, Taschenbuch, neu, Nachdruck.
Lieferung aus: Vereinigtes Königreich Großbritannien und Nordirland, Versandkosten nach: DEU.
Von Händler/Antiquariat, Revaluation Books.
Springer Verlag, 2011. Paperback. New. reprint edition. 233 pages. 9.00x6.00x0.50 inches.
Von Händler/Antiquariat, Revaluation Books.
Springer Verlag, 2011. Paperback. New. reprint edition. 233 pages. 9.00x6.00x0.50 inches.
Lade…