No abstract

:  This article addresses problems of accountability in the system of multilevel governance, organised around networks, as it exists in the EU. An ‘accountability deficit’ arises when gaps are left by the accountability machinery of the several levels of government, supranational and national. This article suggests a new evaluative framework based on the concept of ‘accountability network’, questioning the hierarchical and pyramidal assumptions that presently underpin accountability theory in the EU context. Using case studies of the Community courts and European Ombudsman, the article suggests that ‘accountability networks’ may be emerging, composed of agencies specialising in a specific mode of accountability, which come together or coalesce in a relationship of support, fortified by shared professional expertise and ethos. At present fragmentary and imperfect, these might ultimately be capable of providing effective machinery for accountability in network governance systems.

No abstract

This definitive textbook explores the field of law which allows government and its agencies to practically apply its laws. The subject, affected by policy and political factors, can challenge even the more advanced student. In response, this title looks at both the law and the factors informing it, laying down the foundations of the subject. This contextualised approach also allows the student to develop the broadest possible perspective. Case law and legislation are set out and discussed, and the authors have built in a range of case studies to give a practical emphasis to the study. It is, however, the distinctive theoretical framework for administrative law that the authors develop that distinguishes this title from others and allows for real understanding of the subject. This updated edition will cement the title's seminal status.

Group litigation is becoming commonplace. Rules of standing have been relaxed to allow groups to bring representative actions on behalf of their members or to act`in the public interest'. Groups increasingly intervene in actions between third parties, presenting amicus briefs. This article traces the origins of group action in courts and speculates on the possible effects of changes which blur traditional distinctions between legal and political process, concluding that the legal process must be kept broadly within traditional boundaries, if the qualities of independence, rationality and finality for which it is valued are to be maintained.