Conceptualising strategic litigation
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl/0000-0000-0000-1226Keywords:
Strategic litigation, conceptualisation, definition, legal mobilisation, database researchAbstract
This article conceptualises the term “strategic litigation” in order to provide for a definition of it. Strategic litigation is a tool increasingly used in Europe by individuals and organisations to attain different objectives. Next to that, there is increasing academic attention for the topic. Nevertheless, the exact definition of “strategic litigation” remains unclear. Therefore, this article uses the research method of conceptualisation as well as a database research and additional literature to provide for a definition. It looks firstly at the background concept, involving the range of meanings associated with the term “strategic litigation”, after which a systematised concept is formed. Thereby, use is made of the “necessary and sufficient conditions” (NSC) approach, to develop the conditions necessary and/or sufficient for a case to fit within the category of strategic litigation. Moreover, the external conceptual relations of the term are explored.
Downloads
Metrics
Downloads:
PDF_11_6S_Van_der_Pas_OSLS 1921
XML_11_6S_Van_der_Pas_OSLS 808
References
Adcock, A., and Collier, D., 2001. Measurement Validity: A Shared Standard for Qualitative and Quantitative Research. American Political Science Review, 95(3), 529–546. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055401003100
Baumgärtel, M., 2019. Demanding Rights: Europe’s Supranational Courts and the Dilemma of Migrant Vulnerability. Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108677837
Burstein, P., 1991. Legal Mobilization as a Social Movement Tactic: The Struggle for Equal Employment Opportunity. American Journal of Sociology, 96(5), 1201–1225. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/229653
Chen, A., and Cummings, S., 2013. Public Interest Lawyering: A Contemporary Perspective. New York: Aspen.
Cummings, S., 2012. The Pursuit of Legal Rights – And Beyond. UCLA Law Review [online], 59, 506–549. Available from: https://www.uclalawreview.org/pdf/59-3-2.pdf [Access 22 July 2021].
Cummings, S., and Trubek, L., 2008. Globalizing Public Interest Law. UCLA Journal of International Law and Foreign Affairs [online], 13, 1–53. Available from: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1338304 [Access 22 July 2021]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1338304
de Wit, B., 2017. Strategy: An International Perspective. 6th ed. Andover: Cengage Learning EMEA.
Deva, S., 2009. Public interest litigation in India: a critical review. Civil Justice Quarterly [online], 28(1), 19–40. Available from: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1424236 [Access 22 July 2021].
Duffy, H., 2018. Strategic Human Rights Litigation. Oxford: Hart. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5040/9781509922000
Fuchs, G., 2013. Strategic Litigation for Gender Equality in the Workplace and Legal Opportunity Structures in Four European Countries. Canadian Journal of Law and Society [online], 28(2), 189–208. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1017/cls.2013.21 [Access 22 July 2021]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/cls.2013.21
Goertz, G., 2006. Social Science Concepts: A User’s Guide. Princeton University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400842995
Lehoucq, E., and Taylor, W.K., 2020. Conceptualizing Legal Mobilization: How Should We Understand the Deployment of Legal Strategies? Law & Social Inquiry [online], 45(1), 166. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1017/lsi.2019.59 [Access 22 July 2021]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/lsi.2019.59
Lemley, M., and Weiser, P., 2007. Should Property or Liability Rules Govern Information? Texas Law Review [online], 85(4). Available from: https://scholar.law.colorado.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1346&context=articles [Access 22 July 2021].
McCann, M., ed., 2006. Law and Social Movements. Aldershot: Ashgate.
Mintzberg, H., 1987. The Strategy Concept I: Five Ps for Strategy. California Management Review, 30(1), 11–24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/41165263
O’Neill, A., 2015. Strategic litigation before the European Courts. ERA Forum, 16(4), 495–508. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12027-015-0409-9
Prakken d’Oliveira, 2019a. Court of Appeal: The Dutch State is not obliged to actively help repatriate Dutch children and mothers from Syria. Prakken d’Oliveira [online], 6 December. Available from: https://www.prakkendoliveira.nl/en/news/2019/court-of-appeal-the-dutch-state-is-not-obliged-to-actively-help-repatriate-dutch-children-and-mothers-from-syria [Access 24 August 2021].
Prakken d’Oliveira, 2019b. Sea-Watch also wins appeal against the Dutch State. Prakken d’Oliveira [online], 1 August. Available from: https://www.prakkendoliveira.nl/en/news/2019/sea-watch-also-wins-appeal-against-the-dutch-state [Access 24 August 2021].
Pring, G., 1989. SLAPPs: Strategic Lawsuits against Public Participation. Pace Environmental Law Review [online], 7(1). Available from: https://digitalcommons.pace.edu/pelr/vol7/iss1/11 [Access 22 July 2021]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.58948/0738-6206.1535
Ramsden, M., and Gledhill, K., 2019. Defining Strategic Litigation. Civil Justice Quarterly, 4, 407-426.
Scheingold, S., and Sarat, A., 2004. Something to Believe In: Politics, Professionalism, and Cause Lawyering. Redwood City: Stanford University Press.
Shepard, L.A., 1993. Evaluating Test Validity. In: L. Darling-Hammon, ed., Review of Research in Education. Washington, DC: AERA, 405–450. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1167347
Southworth, A., 2005. Conservative Lawyers and the Contest over the Meaning of Public Interest Law. UCLA Law Review [online], 52(4), 1223–1278. Available from: https://www.uclalawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/30_52UCLALRev12232004-2005.pdf [Access 22 July 2021].
Zemans, F., 1983. Legal Mobilization: The Neglected Role of the Law in the Political System. The American Political Science Review, 77(3), 690–703. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1957268
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Kris van der Pas
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
OSLS strictly respects intellectual property rights and it is our policy that the author retains copyright, and articles are made available under a Creative Commons licence. The Creative Commons Non-Commercial Attribution No-Derivatives licence is our default licence, further details available at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 If this is not acceptable to you, please contact us.
The non-exclusive permission you grant to us includes the rights to disseminate the bibliographic details of the article, including the abstract supplied by you, and to authorise others, including bibliographic databases, indexing and contents alerting services, to copy and communicate these details.
For information on how to share and store your own article at each stage of production from submission to final publication, please read our Self-Archiving and Sharing policy.
The Copyright Notice showing the author and co-authors, and the Creative Commons license will be displayed on the article, and you must agree to this as part of the submission process. Please ensure that all co-authors are properly attributed and that they understand and accept these terms.
