Social rights interpretation in Brazil and South Africa

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Rosevear, Evan
Data de Publicação: 2018
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Revista de Investigações Constitucionais
Texto Completo: https://revistas.ufpr.br/rinc/article/view/60968
Resumo: In this paper, I examine the social rights jurisprudence of Brazil and South Africa, two jurisdictions that have adopted markedly different approaches to their interpretation. In doing so, I advance three arguments relating to the study of social rights adjudication and the effects of the resulting jurisprudence. First, understanding the development of social rights jurisprudence requires understanding the pre-existing set of judicial norms that define the role of the judges and acceptable mode(s) of legal reasoning. Second, variations in institutional design and understandings of precedent means that one cannot assume that the decisions of the apex court will be universally or quickly incorporated into the decision of the lower courts. As such, it may be necessary to look beyond apex court decisions to get an accurate picture of patterns of social rights jurisprudence in a given jurisdiction. Third, both of the dominant approaches have the potential to institgate significant policy change, but they also encourage different type of litigation and different litigants. This, in turn affects the approach taken to addressing the policy areas and does not necessarily lead to the prioritization of areas where the investment of state resources will yield the greatest returns or be the most socially just.
id UFPR-14_a0eea64adb73f8b9d845a083dc030867
oai_identifier_str oai:revistas.ufpr.br:article/60968
network_acronym_str UFPR-14
network_name_str Revista de Investigações Constitucionais
repository_id_str
spelling Social rights interpretation in Brazil and South AfricaLaw; Constitutional Lawsocial rights; Brazil; South Africa; jurisprudence; comparative constitutionalism.Social RightsIn this paper, I examine the social rights jurisprudence of Brazil and South Africa, two jurisdictions that have adopted markedly different approaches to their interpretation. In doing so, I advance three arguments relating to the study of social rights adjudication and the effects of the resulting jurisprudence. First, understanding the development of social rights jurisprudence requires understanding the pre-existing set of judicial norms that define the role of the judges and acceptable mode(s) of legal reasoning. Second, variations in institutional design and understandings of precedent means that one cannot assume that the decisions of the apex court will be universally or quickly incorporated into the decision of the lower courts. As such, it may be necessary to look beyond apex court decisions to get an accurate picture of patterns of social rights jurisprudence in a given jurisdiction. Third, both of the dominant approaches have the potential to institgate significant policy change, but they also encourage different type of litigation and different litigants. This, in turn affects the approach taken to addressing the policy areas and does not necessarily lead to the prioritization of areas where the investment of state resources will yield the greatest returns or be the most socially just.NINC - Núcleo de Investigações Constitucionais da UFPRRosevear, Evan2018-09-05info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionArtigo avaliado pelos paresapplication/pdfhttps://revistas.ufpr.br/rinc/article/view/6096810.5380/rinc.v5i3.60968Revista de Investigações Constitucionais; v. 5, n. 3 (2018): setembro/dezembro - Dossiê: "The 30th Anniversary of the 1988 Brazilian Constitution"; 149-183Revista de Investigações Constitucionais; v. 5, n. 3 (2018): setembro/dezembro - Dossiê: "The 30th Anniversary of the 1988 Brazilian Constitution"; 149-183Revista de Investigações Constitucionais; v. 5, n. 3 (2018): setembro/dezembro - Dossiê: "The 30th Anniversary of the 1988 Brazilian Constitution"; 149-1832359-563910.5380/rinc.v5i3reponame:Revista de Investigações Constitucionaisinstname:Universidade Federal do Paraná (UFPR)instacron:UFPRenghttps://revistas.ufpr.br/rinc/article/view/60968/37522Direitos autorais 2019 Evan Rosevearhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2019-01-15T18:01:24Zoai:revistas.ufpr.br:article/60968Revistahttps://revistas.ufpr.br/rincPUBhttps://revistas.ufpr.br/rinc/oairevista@ninc.com.br||2359-56392359-5639opendoar:2019-01-15T18:01:24Revista de Investigações Constitucionais - Universidade Federal do Paraná (UFPR)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Social rights interpretation in Brazil and South Africa
title Social rights interpretation in Brazil and South Africa
spellingShingle Social rights interpretation in Brazil and South Africa
Rosevear, Evan
Law; Constitutional Law
social rights; Brazil; South Africa; jurisprudence; comparative constitutionalism.
Social Rights
title_short Social rights interpretation in Brazil and South Africa
title_full Social rights interpretation in Brazil and South Africa
title_fullStr Social rights interpretation in Brazil and South Africa
title_full_unstemmed Social rights interpretation in Brazil and South Africa
title_sort Social rights interpretation in Brazil and South Africa
author Rosevear, Evan
author_facet Rosevear, Evan
author_role author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Rosevear, Evan
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Law; Constitutional Law
social rights; Brazil; South Africa; jurisprudence; comparative constitutionalism.
Social Rights
topic Law; Constitutional Law
social rights; Brazil; South Africa; jurisprudence; comparative constitutionalism.
Social Rights
description In this paper, I examine the social rights jurisprudence of Brazil and South Africa, two jurisdictions that have adopted markedly different approaches to their interpretation. In doing so, I advance three arguments relating to the study of social rights adjudication and the effects of the resulting jurisprudence. First, understanding the development of social rights jurisprudence requires understanding the pre-existing set of judicial norms that define the role of the judges and acceptable mode(s) of legal reasoning. Second, variations in institutional design and understandings of precedent means that one cannot assume that the decisions of the apex court will be universally or quickly incorporated into the decision of the lower courts. As such, it may be necessary to look beyond apex court decisions to get an accurate picture of patterns of social rights jurisprudence in a given jurisdiction. Third, both of the dominant approaches have the potential to institgate significant policy change, but they also encourage different type of litigation and different litigants. This, in turn affects the approach taken to addressing the policy areas and does not necessarily lead to the prioritization of areas where the investment of state resources will yield the greatest returns or be the most socially just.
publishDate 2018
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2018-09-05
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv

dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
Artigo avaliado pelos pares
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://revistas.ufpr.br/rinc/article/view/60968
10.5380/rinc.v5i3.60968
url https://revistas.ufpr.br/rinc/article/view/60968
identifier_str_mv 10.5380/rinc.v5i3.60968
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://revistas.ufpr.br/rinc/article/view/60968/37522
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Direitos autorais 2019 Evan Rosevear
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Direitos autorais 2019 Evan Rosevear
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv NINC - Núcleo de Investigações Constitucionais da UFPR
publisher.none.fl_str_mv NINC - Núcleo de Investigações Constitucionais da UFPR
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Revista de Investigações Constitucionais; v. 5, n. 3 (2018): setembro/dezembro - Dossiê: "The 30th Anniversary of the 1988 Brazilian Constitution"; 149-183
Revista de Investigações Constitucionais; v. 5, n. 3 (2018): setembro/dezembro - Dossiê: "The 30th Anniversary of the 1988 Brazilian Constitution"; 149-183
Revista de Investigações Constitucionais; v. 5, n. 3 (2018): setembro/dezembro - Dossiê: "The 30th Anniversary of the 1988 Brazilian Constitution"; 149-183
2359-5639
10.5380/rinc.v5i3
reponame:Revista de Investigações Constitucionais
instname:Universidade Federal do Paraná (UFPR)
instacron:UFPR
instname_str Universidade Federal do Paraná (UFPR)
instacron_str UFPR
institution UFPR
reponame_str Revista de Investigações Constitucionais
collection Revista de Investigações Constitucionais
repository.name.fl_str_mv Revista de Investigações Constitucionais - Universidade Federal do Paraná (UFPR)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv revista@ninc.com.br||
_version_ 1797174658145976320