Knightian Uncertainty, Systemic Risk Regulation, and the Limits of Judicial Review

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patricia A. McCoy
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Systemic Risk ◽  
Knightian Uncertainty ◽  
Risk Regulation

Systemic Unfairness, Access to Justice and Futility: A Framework

2020 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
pp. 561-590
Author(s):  
Abi Adams-Prassl ◽  
Jeremias Adams-Prassl
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
Conceptual Framework ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Systemic Risk ◽  
System Level ◽  
Access To Justice ◽  
Easy Task ◽  
Policy Level ◽  
English Law ◽  
Combined Impact

Abstract This article develops a conceptual framework for access to justice as a ground of judicial review in English law. We identify a hitherto undertheorised strand of cases which enable courts to review policy within proper constitutional bounds: the doctrine of systemic unfairness, which focuses on risks inherent in a system as a whole. In the context of access to justice, the relevant systemic risk is one of futility: a rational litigant’s inability to vindicate a meritorious claim. Proving the required facts in the context of judicial review proceedings is not an easy task. Litigants must look beyond the realisation of harm to the mechanisms which put access to justice at risk. It is only where the combined impact or cost of system-level risk is particularly severe that a policy-level challenge will succeed on access to justice grounds.

scholarly journals Basic Indicators of Systemic Risk in the EU Banking Sector. Implications for Banking Regulation

2015 ◽  
Vol 47 (1) ◽  
pp. 36-55 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katarzyna Sum
Keyword(s):  
Systemic Risk ◽  
Banking Sector ◽  
Empirical Investigation ◽  
Stress Test ◽  
Balance Sheet ◽  
Banking Regulation ◽  
Risk Regulation ◽  
Test Analysis ◽  
Supranational Level ◽  
The Eu

Abstract The issue of systemic risk regulation and management has gained substantial attention following the latest financial crisis. In the case of the EU it became crucial to deal with the systemic risk problem on a supranational level since the banking sectors of the member countries are highly integrated. While substantial measures have been undertaken to mitigate systemic risk in the EU, the discussion of further reforms continues. This study’s goal is to assess basic indicators of systemic risk in the EU banking sector by using three complementary methods: a forward-looking stock market data analysis, an EU-stress test analysis for systemically important banks, and an empirical investigation of the relation between banking regulation and systemic risk as measured by bank balance sheet indicators. The results lead to a recommendation of further necessary regulatory reforms, which appear in the conclusion.

scholarly journals Judicial Review of Compliance with the Precautionary Principle from Paraquat to Blaise: “Quantitative Thresholds,” Risk Assessment, and the Gap Between Regulation and Regulatory Implementation

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 184-215
Author(s):  
Giulia Claudia Leonelli
Keyword(s):  
Precautionary Principle ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Acceptable Risk ◽  
Risk Regulation ◽  
True Nature ◽  
The Precautionary Principle ◽  
The Third ◽  
Risk Management Process ◽  
Risk Managers ◽  
The Eu

AbstractThis Article frames the precautionary principle as an inner limit to the EU institutions’ broad discretion in the field of EU risk regulation, contextualizing recourse to the principle against the more encompassing backdrop of socially acceptable risk approaches. On these grounds, it inquires to what extent the precautionary principle may be successfully invoked in challenges to acts which are deemed insufficiently protective. The opening sections set the ground for the analysis. The third section analyzes challenges to regulatory acts, arguing that the Court has followed a quantitative threshold approach. This is legally tenable and appropriate; however, it cannot do justice to the true nature of the precautionary principle. The following sections analyze cases involving legislative acts. This includes an in-depth examination of the recent Blaise case, which has put judicial review of compliance with the precautionary principle under the spotlight. Against this overall background, this Article concludes that judicial review can hardly do justice to the precautionary principle, as applicable to the risk management process and underpinning EU legislative frameworks. It will ultimately rest on EU risk managers and EU legislators to ensure that the principle is applied and that its overarching goals are pursued.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document