<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim">
  <record>
    <leader>00000nam  2200000   4500</leader>
    <controlfield tag="001">INLIS000000000010130</controlfield>
    <controlfield tag="005">20211001121356</controlfield>
    <datafield tag="035" ind1="#" ind2="#">
      <subfield code="a">0010-1021000008</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <controlfield tag="007">ta</controlfield>
    <controlfield tag="008">211001################|##########|#|##</controlfield>
    <datafield tag="020" ind1="#" ind2="#">
      <subfield code="a">9781315590769</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="082" ind1="#" ind2="#">
      <subfield code="a">341.242</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="084" ind1="#" ind2="#">
      <subfield code="a">341.242 KEL j</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="100" ind1=" " ind2="#">
      <subfield code="a">Kelemen, Katalin</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="#">
      <subfield code="a">Judicial dissent in European constitutional courts :</subfield>
      <subfield code="b">a comparative and legal perspective /</subfield>
      <subfield code="c">Katalin Kelemen</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="250" ind1="#" ind2="#">
      <subfield code="a">1st edition</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="260" ind1="#" ind2="#">
      <subfield code="a">London :</subfield>
      <subfield code="b">Routledge,</subfield>
      <subfield code="c">2016</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="300" ind1="#" ind2="#">
      <subfield code="a">226 pages</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="650" ind1="#" ind2="4">
      <subfield code="a">Dissenting opinions--Europe</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="520" ind1="#" ind2="#">
      <subfield code="a">Dissent in courts has always existed. It is natural and healthy that judges disagree on legal issues of a certain importance and difficulty. The question is if it is reasonable to conceal dissent. Not every legal system allows judges to explain their disagreement to the public in a separate opinion attached to the judgment of the court. Most constitutional courts do. This book presents a comparative analysis of the practice of judicial dissent in constitutional courts from the perspective of the civil law tradition. It discusses the theoretical background, presents the history of the institution and today’s practice, thus laying down the basis for an accurate consideration of the phenomenon from a legal perspective.</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="500" ind1="#" ind2="#">
      <subfield code="a">&lt;a href="https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/9781315590769"&gt;e-book&lt;/a&gt;</subfield>
    </datafield>
  </record>
</collection>
