While comparative constitutional law is a well-established field, less attention has been paid so far to the comparative dimension of constitutional history. The present volume, edited by Francesco Biagi, Justin O. Frosini and Jason Mazzone, aims to address this shortcoming by bringing focus to comparative constitutional history, which holds considerable promise for engaging and innovative work along several key avenues of inquiry. The essays contained in this volume focus on the origins and design of constitutional governments and the sources that have impacted the ways in which constitutional systems began and developed, the evolution of the principle of separation of powers among branches of government, as well as the origins, role and function of constitutional and supreme courts.

Contributors include: Mark Somos, Gohar Karapetian, Justin O. Frosini, Viktoriia Lapa, Miguel Manero de Lemos, Francesco Biagi, Ctherine Andrews, Gonçalo de Almeida Ribeiro, Mario Alberto Cajas-Sarria, and Fabian Duessel.
Author: Shreya Atrey
This volume in the Brill Research Perspectives in Comparative Discrimination Law addresses intersectionality from the lens of comparative antidiscrimination law. The term ‘intersectionality’ was coined by Kimberlé Williams Crenshaw in 1989. As a field, intersectionality has a longer history, of nearly two hundred years. Meanwhile, comparative antidiscrimination law as a field may be just over a few decades old. Thus, intersectionality’s tryst with antidiscrimination law is a fairly recent one. Developed as a critique of antidiscrimination law, intersectionality has had a significant influence on it. Yet, intersectionality’s logic does not seem to have infiltrated the logic of antidiscrimination law completely. Comparative antidiscrimination law continues to develop with intersectionality in sight, but rarely, in step. On the occasion of the 30th anniversary of Crenshaw’s seminal article that coined the term in the context of antidiscrimination law, Shreya Atrey explores this irony. Her article provides a meta-narrative of the development of the two fields with the purpose of showing what appear to be orthogonal trajectories.
Between Discrimination and Protection at the Legislative, Executive and Judicial Levels
State, Religion and Muslims: Between Discrimination and Protection at the Legislative, Executive and Judicial Levels brings together academics from different disciplines and offers an in-depth analysis of discrimination in specific areas of life which affects Muslims in Western countries. The volume undertakes a comprehensive examination of the discriminatory practices across 12 countries while situating them in their institutional frameworks.

Exploring critical aspects of discrimination against Muslims – in areas such as education, employment, exercise of religion, state relations with religious communities as well as hate crime and hate speech – the volume shows the prevalence of individual, structural and institutional discrimination against Muslims living in Western countries.

Contributors are: Amina Easat-Daas, Andrea Pin, Beesan Sarrouh, Camille Vallier, Dieter Schiendlauer, Eva Brems, Ineke van der Valk, Ksenija Šabec, Maja Pucelj, Mario Peucker, Mosa Sayed, Nesa Zimmermann, Niels Valdemar Vinding and Safa ben Saad.
The driving force of the dynamic development of world legal history in the past few centuries, with the dominance of the West, was clearly the demands of modernisation – transforming existing reality into what is seen as modern. The need for modernisation, determining the development of modern law, however, clashed with the need to preserve cultural identity rooted in national traditions. With selected examples of different legal institutions, countries and periods, the authors of the essays in the two volumes Modernisation, National Identity and Legal Instrumentalism: Studies in Comparative Legal History, vol. I:Private Law and Modernisation, National Identity and Legal Instrumentalism: Studies in Comparative Legal History, vol. II: Public Law seek to explain the nature of this problem.

Contributors are Michał Gałędek, Katrin Kiirend-Pruuli, Anna Klimaszewska, Łukasz Jan Korporowicz, Beata J. Kowalczyk, Marju Luts-Sootak, Marcin Michalak, Annamaria Monti, Zsuzsanna Peres, Sara Pilloni, Hesi Siimets-Gross, Sean Thomas, Bart Wauters, Steven Wilf, and Mingzhe Zhu.
The driving force of the dynamic development of world legal history in the past few centuries, with the dominance of the West, was clearly the demands of modernisation – transforming existing reality into what is seen as modern. The need for modernisation, determining the development of modern law, however, clashed with the need to preserve cultural identity rooted in national traditions. With selected examples of different legal institutions, countries and periods, the authors of the essays in the two volumes Modernisation, National Identity and Legal Instrumentalism: Studies in Comparative Legal History, vol. I: Private Law and Modernisation, National Identity and Legal Instrumentalism: Studies in Comparative Legal History, vol. II: Public Law seek to explain the nature of this problem.

Contributors are Judit Beke-Martos, Jiří Brňovják, Marjorie Carvalho de Souza, Michał Gałędek, Imre Képessy, Ivan Kosnica, Simon Lavis, Maja Maciejewska-Szałas, Tadeusz Maciejewski, Thomas Mohr, Balázs Pálvölgyi, and Marek Starý.
Author: Odile Ammann
Author: Yu Yan
In Road Traffic Liability in China: A View from Law and Economics, Yu Yan provides an in-depth analysis of the Chinese road traffic liability system, as well as other alternative accident prevention schemes from a view of law and economics. The analysis refers to the functioning of the system both on paper and in practice. The conclusion shows that the current Chinese traffic liability system can only achieve partial deterrence, and that the problems of under-compensation and insufficient risk-spreading seem to be serious, at least in the economically underdeveloped regions. Based on these findings, Yu Yan suggests specific legislative changes to be taken for the policymakers to improve the system.
Contemporary Discussions in Shī ͑ī Legal Theory
In Visions of Sharīʿa Bhojani, De Rooij and Bohlander present the first broad examination of ways in which legal theory ( uṣūl al-fiqh) within Twelver Shīʿī thought continues to be a forum for vibrant debates regarding the assumptions, epistemology and hermeneutics of Sharīʿa in contemporary Shīʿī thought. Bringing together authoritative voices and emerging scholars, from both ‘traditional’ seminaries and ‘Western’ academies, the distinct critical insider and emic accounts provided develop a novel avenue in Islamic legal studies. Contextualised through reference to the history of Shīʿī legal theory as well as contemporary juristic practice and socio-political considerations, the volume demonstrates how one of the most intellectually vibrant and developed discourses of Islamic thought continues to be a key forum for exploring visions of Sharīʿa.
Launched in 1965, the Australian Year Book of International Law (AYBIL) is Australia’s longest standing and most prestigious dedicated international law publication.
The Year Book aims to uniquely combine scholarly commentary with contributions from Australian government officials. Each volume contains a mix of scholarly articles, invited lectures, book reviews, notes of decisions by Australian and international courts, recent legislation, and collected Australian international law state practice.
It is a valuable resource for those working in the field of international law, including government officials, international organisation officials, non-government and community organisations, legal practitioners, academics and other researchers, as well as students studying international law, international relations, human rights and international affairs.
It focuses on Australian practice in international law and general international law, across a broad range of sub-fields including human rights, environmental law and legal theory, which are of interest to international lawyers worldwide. Volume 36 features an Agora on the 2018 Timor Sea Treaty and Conciliation between Australia and Timor Leste.