The Court of Justice of the European Union and the illusion of balancing in internet-related disputes

Filippo Fontanelli*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Abstract / Description of output

This chapter presents the UK Constitution which was categorised as a system with a 'weak form' of judicial review. In the UK Supreme Court's decision in Kennedy, Lord Mance noted that there is often no difference between the protection of freedom of expression under the common law, and in some cases the common law may provide more expansive protection. Whilst the scheme of rights protection is designed to work alongside the principle of legislative supremacy, the UK courts have numerous tools with which to protect fundamental rights. The chapter discusses the UK courts and the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) which share the same approach to freedom of expression. It considers whether any changes to the general principles in the Article 10 jurisprudence are required in the light of the new communications environment. When looking at the internet, the Court has tended to apply with reference to the traditional principles.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationThe Internet and Constitutional Law
Subtitle of host publicationThe protection of fundamental rights and constitutional adjudication in Europe
EditorsOreste Pollicino, Graziella Romeo
Place of PublicationLondon
PublisherRoutledge
Chapter5
Pages94-118
Number of pages25
Edition1st
ISBN (Electronic)9781317407980
ISBN (Print)9781138924987, 9780367597153
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 21 Jan 2016

Publication series

NameRoutledge Research in Constitutional Law

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'The Court of Justice of the European Union and the illusion of balancing in internet-related disputes'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this