Abstract
Purpose - Analyzing the adjudication of the constitutional right to water in comparative law and its theoretical and practical implications. Methodology/approach/design - A theoretical and jurisprudential analysis of the standards of reasonableness, the minimum core and proportionality, used in different jurisdictions for adjudicating claims grounded in the constitutional right to water. Findings - The advantages and disadvantages of reasonableness, the minimum core and proportionality as standards for adjudicating the constitutional right to water. Practical implications - The article shows that the adjudication of the employment of the principle of proportionality is the best comparative practice concerning the adjudication of the constitutional right to water. Originality/value - The text fills a gap on the topic, especially in light of the problems arising out of localized water crises or economic, social or legal disputes over water use in scenarios of scarcity.
| Translated title of the contribution | The Protection of the fundamental right to water in international and comparative perspective |
|---|---|
| Original language | Portuguese |
| Pages (from-to) | 1-38 |
| Number of pages | 38 |
| Journal | Journal of law and regulation = Revista de Direito Setorial e Regulatório |
| Volume | 1 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| Publication status | Published - 2015 |
Bibliographical note
Version archived for private and non-commercial use with the permission of the author/s and according to publisher conditions. For further rights please contact the publisher.Keywords
- Constitutional right to water
- Comparative law
- Reasonableness
- Minimum core
- Proportionality