| Autorzy: |
Gabriel
Encinas
Universidad Autónoma de Baja California |
| Słowa kluczowe: | stykające się doktryny obce normy prawne standardy rozumowanie międzyprawne równoważenie międzyprawne |
| Data publikacji całości: | 2026 |
| Liczba stron: | 20 (25-44) |
| Liczba pobrań ?: | 3 |
| 1. | Aguiló Regla J., Acordar, debatir y negociar, “Doxa” 2018, vol. 41. |
| 2. | Alexy R., A Theory of Constitutional Rights, Oxford 2010. |
| 3. | Alexy R., The Dual Nature of Law, “Ratio Juris” 2010, vol. 23, no. 2. |
| 4. | Ariza R., Padilla G., Elementos de ponderación e interpretación intercultural, in: M. Fuchs et al. (eds.), Manual de pluralismo jurídico para la práctica de la justicia intercultural, Bogotá 2022. |
| 5. | Bäcker C., Reglas, principios y derrotabilidad, “Doxa” 2014, vol. 37. |
| 6. | Bradley C.A., Self-Execution and Treaty Duality, “The Supreme Court Review” 2008, no. 1. |
| 7. | Canale D., Comparative Reasoning in Legal Adjudication, “Canadian Journal of Law & Jurisprudence” 2015, vol. 28, no. 1. |
| 8. | Carpentier M., Validity Versus Applicability: A (Small) Dose of Scepticism, “Diritto & Questioni pubbliche” 2018, vol. 18, no. 1. |
| 9. | das Chagas C.A., Judicial Avoidance: Balancing Competences in Constitutional Adjudication, Oxford 2023. |
| 10. | Dodge W., International Comity in American Law, “Columbia Law Review” 2015, vol. 115, no. 8. |
| 11. | Douek E., Lakier G., Lochner.com?, “Harvard Law Review” 2024, vol. 138, no. 1. |
| 12. | Encinas Duarte G.A., Interlegal Argumentation in the UK Drill Music Decision of Meta’s Oversight Board, “Journal of Argumentation in Context” 2025, vol. 14, no. 1. |
| 13. | Encinas Duarte G.A., Sieckmann J–R., Introduction: Advancing Interlegal reasoning, in: G.A. Encinas Duarte, J–R. Sieckmann (eds.), Interlegal Reasoning: Balancing at the Interfaces, Cham 2026. |
| 14. | Encinas Duarte G.A., Sieckmann J–R. (eds.), Interlegal Reasoning: Balancing at the Interfaces, Cham 2026. |
| 15. | Endicott T., Comity among Authorities, “Current Legal Problems” 2015, vol. 68. |
| 16. | Flynn T., Interlegal Imbalancing: Conditional Recognition and the Bosphorus Presumption, in: G.A. Encinas Duarte, J–R. Sieckmann (eds.), Interlegal Reasoning: Balancing at the Interfaces, Cham 2026. |
| 17. | Gaja G., Positivism and Dualism in Dionisio Anzilotti, “European Journal of International Law” 1996, vol. 3. |
| 18. | Galand A.S., Defer or Revise? Horizontal Dialogue Between UN Treaty Bodies and Regional Human Rights Courts in Duplicative Legal Proceedings, “Human Rights Law Review” 2023, vol. 23, no. 2. |
| 19. | Green M.S., Authority and Interest Analysis, in: R. Banu et al. (eds.), Philosophical Foundations of Private International Law, Oxford 2024. |
| 20. | Griffiths J., What is Legal Pluralism?, “The Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law” 1986, vol. 18, no. 24. |
| 21. | Hart H.L.A., Kelsen’s Doctrine of the Unity of Law, in: H.L.A. Hart, Essays in Jurisprudence and Philosophy, Oxford 1983. |
| 22. | Hart H.L.A., The Concept of Law, Oxford 1961. |
| 23. | Heller K.J., In Defense of Pure Sovereignty in Cyberspace, “International Law Studies” 2021, vol. 97, no. 1. |
| 24. | Hoekema A., European Legal Encounters Between Minority and Majority Cultures: Cases of Interlegality, “The Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law” 2005, vol. 37, no. 51. |
| 25. | Hogic N., Ibrahim I.A., Arctic Indigenous Communities and Antarctic Icebergs as Subjects of Inter–Legality, “Stanford Journal of International Law” 2021, vol. 57, no. 1. |
| 26. | Ita R., Hicks D., Beyond Expansion or Restriction? Models of Interaction between the Living Instrument and Margin of Appreciation Doctrines and the Scope of the ECHR, “International Human Rights Law Review” 2021, vol. 10, no. 1. |
| 27. | Johnstone I., Ratner S.R. (eds.), Talking International Law, Oxford 2021. |
| 28. | Kanetake M., Giving Due Consideration, in: N. Krisch (ed.), Entangled Legalities beyond the State, Oxford 2021. |
| 29. | Kelsen H., Das Problem der Souveränität und die Theorie des Völkerrechts, in: M. Jestaedt (ed.), Hans Kelsen Werke, vol. 4, Mohr Siebeck 2013. |
| 30. | Kelsen H., La transformation du droit international en droit interne, “Revue générale de droit international” 1936, vol. 43. |
| 31. | Klabbers J., Palombella G. (eds.), The Challenge of Inter–Legality, Cambridge 2019. |
| 32. | Klabbers J., Palombella G., (International) Law as Inter–legality, “Ars interpretandi” 2025, vol. 30, no. 1. |
| 33. | Klatt M., Balancing Competences: How Institutional Cosmopolitanism can Manage Jurisdictional Conflicts, “Global Constitutionalism” 2015, vol. 4, no. 2. |
| 34. | Krisch N., Beyond Constitutionalism, Oxford 2010. |
| 35. | Lee H.J., Reassessing the Margin of Appreciation in ECtHR Jurisprudence: Inter-Legal Reasoning, Proportionality, and the Rights of Sexual Minorities, in: G.A. Encinas Duarte, |
| 36. | J–R. Sieckmann (eds.), Interlegal Reasoning: Balancing at the Interfaces, Cham 2026. |
| 37. | Mac Amhlaigh C., Taking Identity Seriously: On the Politics of the Individuation of Legal Systems, “Oxford Journal of Legal Studies” 2022, vol. 42, no. 2. |
| 38. | MacCormick N., Institutions of Law, Oxford 2007. |
| 39. | MacCormick N., Questioning Sovereignty, Oxford 1999. |
| 40. | Maley Y., From Adjudication to Mediation: Third Party Discourse in Conflict Resolution, “Journal of Pragmatics” 1995, vol. 23, no. 1. |
| 41. | Michaels R., The Re-State-Ment of Non-State Law: The State, Choice of Law, and the Challenge from Global Legal Pluralism, “The Wayne Law Review” 2005, vol. 51. |
| 42. | Moreso J.J., On the Exclusionary Scope of Razian Reasons, “Ratio Juris” 2024, vol. 37, no. 2. |
| 43. | Muñíz–Fraticelli V., The Structure of Pluralism, Oxford 2014. |
| 44. | Navarro P., The Uncertain Limits of Law. Some Remarks on Legal Positivism and Legal Systems, “Analisi e Diritto” 2018, vol. 18, no. 2. |
| 45. | Núñez J.E., Cosmopolitanism, State Sovereignty and International Law and Politics: a Theory, Abingdon and New York 2024. |
| 46. | Orellana Halkyer R., Interlegalidad y campos jurídicos: Discurso y derecho en la configuración de órdenes semiautónomos en comunidades quechuas de Bolivia, doctoral thesis, University of Amsterdam 2004. |
| 47. | Palombella G., The Rule of Law, Democracy, and International Law. Learning from the US Experience, “Ratio Juris” 2007, vol. 20, no. 4. |
| 48. | Palombella G., Inter-Legality: On Interconnections and ‘External’ Sources, “Italian Law Journal” 2021, vol. 7, no. 2. |
| 49. | Phelan W., The Role of the German and Italian Constitutional Courts in the Rise of EU Human Rights Jurisprudence: A Response to Delledonne and Fabbrini, “European Law Review” 2021, vol. 46, no. 2. |
| 50. | Raz J., The Institutional Nature of Law, “The Modern Law Review” 1975, vol. 38, no. 5. |
| 51. | Raz J., The Concept of a Legal System, Oxford 1980. |
| 52. | Raz J., The Morality of Freedom, Oxford 1986. |
| 53. | Roughan N., The Association of State and Indigenous Law: A Case Study in ‘Legal Association’, “University of Toronto Law Journal” 2009, vol. 59, no. 2. |
| 54. | Roughan N., Authorities, Oxford 2013. |
| 55. | Roughan N., The Rule of Interlegality, “Buffalo Law Review” 2024, vol. 72, no. 5. |
| 56. | Schäfer M., Treaty Overriding, Tübingen 2020. |
| 57. | Serec F.E., Brazil, in: S. Grubbs (ed.), International Civil Procedure, The Hague 2003. |
| 58. | Shany Y., Regulating Jurisdictional Relations between National and International Courts, Oxford 2007. |
| 59. | Shirlow E., Judging at the Interface, Cambridge 2021. |
| 60. | Sieckmann J–R., Autonomy and Law, Cham 2025. |
| 61. | Sieckmann J–R., Legislation as balancing, in: Á.D. Oliver–Lalana (ed.), Conceptions and Misconceptions of Legislation, Cham 2019. |
| 62. | Sieckmann J–R., Rechtsphilosophie, Tübingen 2018. |
| 63. | Solum L.B., Legal Theory Lexicon 026: Rules, Standards, Principles, Catalogs, and Discretion, https://legaltheorylexicon.com/2004/03/legal_theory_le_3-4. |
| 64. | Solum L.B., Chung M., The Layers Principle: Internet Architecture and the Law, “Notre Dame Law Review” 2003, vol. 79, no. 3. |
| 65. | Viellechner L., “Friendliness” Towards Others: How the German Constitution Deals with Legal Pluralism, in: G. Tusseau (ed.), Debating Legal Pluralism and Constitutionalism, Cham 2020. |
| 66. | Vinx L., The Kelsen–Hart Debate: Hart’s Critique of Kelsen’s Legal Monism Reconsidered, |
| 67. | in: D. Telman (ed.), Hans Kelsen in America: Selective Affinities and the Mysteries of Academic Influence, Cham 2016. |
| 68. | Walker N., Intimations of Global Law, Cambridge 2015. |
