The Review

May 2018 Issue


Reproductive Health: Morals, Margins and Rights

Reproductive interventions and technologies have the capacity to generate profound societal unease and to provoke hostile reactions underpinned by various moral concerns. This paper shows that this position currently goes relatively unchecked by the European Court of Human Rights, which allows the margin of appreciation and consensus doctrines significantly to limit the scope of reproductive rights under the right to respect for private and family life under Article 8.

Rosamund Scott



An Improved Protection for the (Mentally Ill) Trans Parent: A Queer Reading of AP, Garçon and Nicot v France

In April 2017 the ECtHR held that the legal recognition of gender transition cannot be made conditional upon pursuing medical or surgical procedures which have (or are likely to have) sterilising effects. This article analyses the judgment from a critical perspective grounded in queer theory, noting both the positive and the negative elements of the Court's decision.

Damian A Gonzalez-Salzberg

book reviews

Review of Nicola Lupo and Cristina Fasone (eds), Interparliamentary Cooperation in the Composite European Constitution, Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2016, xvii + 366 pp, hb £59.99.

Amidst an explosion in academic writing on the role of national parliaments and interparliamentary cooperation in the Lisbon and post-Lisbon EU, this valuable new collection brings together leading and emerging scholars in the field of interparliamentary cooperation from legal and political science backgrounds along with contributions from a number of practitioners.

Mario Mendez

Review of Alan Norrie, Justice and the Slaughter Bench: Essays on Law's Broken Dialectic, Abingdon: Routledge, 2016, 222 pp, hb £110.00, pb £36.99.

Alan Norrie is one of the leading voices in the critical analysis of criminal law. In this book, he brings together a collection of recent essays and articles that develop two distinctive themes in his work to date: law's 'architectonic' and its 'constellation', challenging both liberal and critical legal theory, as part of a project of judging 'law's judgment'.

Peter Ramsay

Review of Anthea Roberts, Is International Law International?, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017, 420 pp, hb £25.99.

Continuing her previous work examining the concept of ‘comparative international law,’ Anthea Roberts’ book represents a rare and valuable attempt to understand how pronounced differences of interpretation arise in, and structure, the study and practice of international law. For a profession that is profoundly dedicated to conceiving of itself as an ‘invisible college’ of members working towards a common project, there is much to be gained from taking a hard look at the reality of the ‘divisible college’.

Ryan Mitchell

Review of Gregory Messenger, The Development of World Trade Organization Law: Examining Change in International Law, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016, 216 pp, hb £70.00.

It is easy to view the current instability in the international trading order as a time of upheaval and transformation, and to frame what came before as static and stable. Against this backdrop, Gregory Messenger’s meticulous, scholarly and ‘multi-causal’ portrait of the development of WTO law provides a thoughtful reminder that change has always been a central feature of the system.

Christopher Alexander Thomas

Review of Dimitrios Kyritsis, Where Our Protection Lies: Separation of Powers and Constitutional Review, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017, 240 PP, hb £50.00.

In his new book, Dimitrios Kyritsis sets out a ‘moralized constitutional theory’, according to which questions of constitutional theory are questions of political morality. Working at the intersection of legal and political theory, Kyritsis tells a story of courts and legislatures as partners in a ‘joint project’ of political governance, and in so doing provides a framework with which to analyse one of the most controversial questions of constitutional theory: the justifiability of constitutional review of legislation

Conor Crummey

Review of John M. Collins, Martial Law and English Laws, c 1500‐c 1700, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016, xiv + 319 pp, hb £64.99.

Jurists have long recognised a distinction between military law, which is seen as the code of rules enforced by military courts regulating the conduct of the armed forces, and martial law, which is seen as the resort to extra-legal force to restore order in times of invasion or emergency. In this meticulously-researched and well-written volume, John M. Collins argues that this distinction did not exist in early modern England, and that it only came into being after 1689 with the passage of the Mutiny Acts.

Michael Lobban

The Review

Published May 2018
Frequency Bi-Monthly
Volume 81
Issue 3
Print ISSN 0026-7961
Online ISSN 1468-2230

Virtual Issues

Virtual Issues contain curated content drawn from the MLR