Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Objectives and Methods of a Transnational Science of Administrative Law

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Common European Legal Thinking

  • 860 Accesses

Abstract

Looking through the publications of the past decades in the field of Public law, an increasing number of books and articles dealing with subjects and analytical questions that transcend the national legal sphere can be observed. Often, it is obvious that the steadily expanding European law gave rise to such studies. However, the range of analysed issues reaches further: Legal studies and not least the science of public law begin to rise above the restrictions of national legal thinking. Among the scholars, who in this sense have broken ground for a more open understanding of legal research, Albrecht Weber has played a prominent role. It suffices to mention his project on the fundamental rights in Europe and North America and his book on European comparative constitutional law. Scholars like Rudolf von Ihering who, at the end of the nineteenth century, called upon his colleagues to overcome the danger that legal science might sink into parochialism, would have very much welcomed this development.

Starting from the findings that the legal discourse has increasingly gained a transnational character, the following reflections will focus on administrative law. They will discuss, first, the national origins of administrative law and early international exchange processes (Sect. 1 and 2), then turn to the progressive development of a European and international administrative law (Sect. 3) and finally discuss the objectives and methods of an emerging transnational legal science that accompanies this evolution (Sect. 4 and 5).

An essentially similar version in German language will be published in the book “Öffentliche Angelegenheiten – interdisziplinär betrachtet”, edited by the author.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Among the most visible publications are the comprehensive collective works Ius Publicum Europaeum (edited by Armin von Bogdandy and Peter M. Huber, so far five volumes, 2007 et seqq.) and Handbuch der Grundrechte in Deutschland und Europa (edited by Detlef Merten and Hans‐Jürgen Papier, so far nine volumes, 2004 et seqq.). An overview of national administrative law systems with a focus on transversal topics of administrative law is offered, for instance, by Michel Fromont (2006), Droit administratif des États européens, Paris: puf. For constitutional law, see Constance Grewe and Hélène Ruiz Fabri (1995), Droits constitutionnels européens, Paris: puf. Comparative texts on particular topics are contained in Giandomenico Falcon (Ed.) (2005), Il diritto amministrativo die paesi europei tra omogeneizzazione e diversità culturali, Padova: CEDAM. For further references see footnotes 2 and 25–31.

  2. 2.

    Albrecht Weber (Ed.) (2001 et seq.), Fundamental Rights in Europe and North America, Part A, The Hague: Kluver; Albrecht Weber (2010), Europäische Verfassungsvergleichung, Munich: Beck.

  3. 3.

    von Ihering 1907, p. 14–15.

  4. 4.

    Scheuner 1963, p. 714. See, from a comparative perspective, already: von Stein 1870, p. 13 (in the new edition by U. Schliesky from 2010, p. 11). According to Stein, the individual differences of the States reflect “the true, unexhaustable wealth of life in the world […] which is nowhere greater than in the field of public administration and its law”.

  5. 5.

    See Eisenhardt 1995, p. 165 et seq. (para 243 et seq.).

  6. 6.

    In Germany, the rationalistic approach was specifically directed against romantic legal thinking which considered law as an evolving expression of national culture and therefore uncodifiable. This line of reasoning was prominently represented by Friedrich Carl von Savigny, 1814.

  7. 7.

    See here Cabrillac 2002, p. 68 et seq.

  8. 8.

    Mohl 1855/56/58 (re‐printed 1960); particularly intense comparative approach in Vol. 3, p. 3 et seq.

  9. 9.

    For a short overview of the origins of administrative law in Europe since the 18th century cf. Sordi 2010, p. 23–36. For the development in Germany cf. Stolleis 1992, p. 229–265, in particular p. 258 et seqq.

  10. 10.

    See especially Mohl 1824; Mohl 1836; Mohl 1844. In his article of 1836 he already discussed Alexis de Tocqueville’s De la démocratie en Amérique, 1835.

  11. 11.

    See Lerg 2011.

  12. 12.

    Cf., in particular, von Stein 1882. For an analysis see Sommermann 2007a, p. 860 et seq. with further references.

  13. 13.

    F.F. Mayer 1862. The main objective of the work was to connect “particularities to general aspects” and to infer the “supreme, guiding principles” (p. V).

  14. 14.

    Orlando 1891. See as well Romano 1901.

  15. 15.

    Jèze 1904. See also the preface of the second edition of 1914. p. VII: “J’ai l’ambition de dégager, des lois, règlements, pratiques administratives et arrêts des tribunaux, les principes juridiques qui dominent l’ensemble des institutions du Droit administratif français.”.

  16. 16.

    O. Mayer 1886.

  17. 17.

    O. Mayer 1914, p. 61 et seq., 95 et seq.

  18. 18.

    Duguit 1913; Duguit 1921–1925.

  19. 19.

    Hauriou 1892; Hauriou 1923.

  20. 20.

    Carré de Malberg 1920/22.

  21. 21.

    For a discussion of German conceptions and doctrines by the cited authors cf. Sommermann 1997, p. 85–89.

  22. 22.

    Cf. the years in which the aforementioned books were published. Heuschling 2008, p. 502 et seq., speaks of the “golden era” of public law theory in France.

  23. 23.

    See the balance drawn 50 years ago on the state of comparative public law and its methods by Kaiser 1964, Strebel 1964, Bernhardt 1964 and Zemanek 1964.

  24. 24.

    Cf. Sommermann 2008a, p. 188–190.

  25. 25.

    Schwarze, 1988, p. I; English version 1992, p.V. New edition of the German original released in 2005, with an introductory discussion of the new developments in European administrative law, 2005.

  26. 26.

    Examples (beyond those in footnote 1) for corresponding comparative overviews in the field of administrative law: Carl Hermann Ule, Franz Becker and Klaus König (Eds.) (1967), Verwaltungsverfahrensgesetze des Auslandes, 2 Volumes, Berlin; Javier Barnes (Ed.) (1993a), El procedimiento administrativo en el Derecho comparado, Madrid; Hermann Hill and Rainer Pitschas (Eds.) (2004), Europäisches Verwaltungsverfahrensrecht, Berlin; Jean‐Bernard Auby (Ed.) (2014), Codification of Administrative Procedure, Brussels. In the field of civil service: Siegfried Magiera and Heinrich Siedentopf (Eds.) (1994), Das Recht des öffentlichen Dienstes in den Mitgliedstaaten der Europäischen Gemeinschaft, Berlin; Christoph Demmke (2004), European Civil Services between Tradition and Reform, Maastricht. For procedural administrative law see: Javier Barnes (Ed.) (1993b), La justicia administrativa en el Derecho comparado, Madrid; Yann Aguila, Yves Kreins and Adam Warren (2007), La justice administrative en Europe/Administrative justice in Europe, Paris. Country reports on various administrative law and constitutional law topics can be found, respectively, in the “Annuaire Européen d’Administration Publique” published by the Centre de Recherches Administratives of Law School of the University of Aix‐en‐Provence (Volume 36 (2013) was recently published) and in the “Annuaire International de Justice Constitutionnelle” of the Gropue d’Études et de Recherches sur la Justice Constitutionnelle of the same University (Vol. 29 (2013) published recently). Albrecht Weber has cooperated in this yearbook, see, for instance Weber 2003.

  27. 27.

    On the terminological question see Sommermann 1991, p. 891; Sommermann 2008a, p. 182; Siegel 2012, p. 70 et seq. (para 68 et seq.).

  28. 28.

    Chiti and Greco 2007.

  29. 29.

    Auby and Dutheil de la Rochère 2007 and second edition 2014.

  30. 30.

    Craig 2006.

  31. 31.

    von Danwitz 2008.

  32. 32.

    Cf. Scheuner 1963, p. 714; Kahn‐Freund 1974, p. 17; Ipsen 1982, p. 123; critical of the thesis of convergence also Siedentopf and Speer 2002, p. 756.

  33. 33.

    Cf. already Fromont 1992, p. 197; cf. also the articles in Marcou 1995; Sommermann 2002.

  34. 34.

    See Britz 2006, p. 46 et seq., and the corresponding chapters in Fehling and Ruffert 2010; from a comparative approach, particularly on Germany and France, Masing and Marcou 2010.

  35. 35.

    See Hodge et. al. 2010; on the European law dimension, see Mörth 2008; Ferraro 2010.

  36. 36.

    See Chevalier 2014, p. 58, 85 et seq. However, cf. also Kuhlmann and Wollmann 2013, p. 244 et seqq. who differentiate between “discursive convergence” and “practice convergence” and hint at the fact that the latter often remains far behind the former.

  37. 37.

    Cf. Sommermann 2014a.

  38. 38.

    Chevalier 2014, p. 311 et seq.

  39. 39.

    European Ombudsman 2005.

  40. 40.

    See König 2003. Approaches in this sense can be found in the contributions to König et al. 2014.

  41. 41.

    Convention on Nuclear Safety of 20.9.1994, UNTS 1963, p. 293; ILM 33 (1994), p. 1518.

  42. 42.

    Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision‐making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters of 25.6.1998, O.J. L 124/4 (2005); ILM 38 (1999), p. 517.

  43. 43.

    Cf. Wiesinger 2013, in particular p. 134 et seq., 322 et seq.

  44. 44.

    Schmidt‐Aßmann 2006, p. 317 et seq.

  45. 45.

    It is in this sense that Engel 1992, p. 451 et seq., and Breining‐Kaufmann 2006, p. 75–136, use the concept, following the tradition of Karl Neumeyer, 1910–1936. For Neumeyer, it is “the task of international administrative law […] to draw the limits of public power in administrative issues against the jurisdiction of other communities, in the same way, as it is the task of international private law to establish the corresponding limits of private law” (Vol. 1, p. IV). For a recent analysis of the conflict‐of‐law rules regarding public law cf. Kment 2010, p. 202–265.

  46. 46.

    In this sense already Tietje 2001, passim; cf. also Schmidt‐Aßmann 2006, p. 335 et seq. (p. 336: “International administrative law means administrative law founded on international law”). Similarly, Cassese 2006, p. 38–67, when recognizing the emergence of a “global administrative law”, puts the focus on networks with national and international actors. In French language one can differentiate between the “droit administratif international”, which refers to the conflicts of law regime, i. e. the territorial scope of norms, and the “droit international administratif” which relates to the international law as a legal source. See Nguyen, 2006 p. 75, 80, 88 et seq.

  47. 47.

    See nowadays Art. 2 TEU; on the evolution cf. Mangiameli, in Blanke and Mangiameli (2013), Article 2 para 1 et seq.; Sommermann 2014b, p. 287, 288 et seq., on the common basis of values in the European Union see also König 2008, p. 845; Chevalier 2014, p. 57 et seq.

  48. 48.

    Cf. Nußberger 2012, p. 148 et seq.

  49. 49.

    See Application No. 21151/04, Megadat.com SRL v. Moldavia (ECtHR of 8 April 2008) para 72: “The Court notes in this connection that where an issue in the general interest is at stake it is incumbent on the public authorities to act in good time, in an appropriate manner and with utmost consistency […].”; in para 73 the Chamber criticises the absence of a hearing. See Application No. 33202/96, Beyeler v. Italy (ECtHR GC of 5 January 2000) para 120, and the later judgments in Application No. 22279/04, Plechanow v. Poland (ECtHR of 7 July2009) para 102, and Application No. 10373/05, Moskal v. Poland (ECtHR of 15 September 2009) para 51; para 72 of the latter reads: “in the context of property rights, particular importance must be attached to the principle of good governance. It is desirable that public authorities act with the utmost scrupulousness, in particular when dealing with matters of vital importance to individuals.”.

  50. 50.

    Cf., in particular, the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development of June 1992, A/CONF. 151/26/Rev. 1, Vol. 1, p. 3; ILM 31 (1992), p. 876.

  51. 51.

    On these foundations of a methodological Europeanization and a transnational science of law cf. von Bogdandy 2011, p. 4, and Duve 2013, p. 7 et seq.

  52. 52.

    For “transnational law” as an analytical framework see Calliess and Maurer 2014, p. 12. Different concepts of “transnational law” are discussed in Viellechner 2014, p. 58–75.

  53. 53.

    For an analysis of the administrative unions see von Liszt 1902, p. 139 et seq., 227 et seq.; Tietje 2001, p. 124 et seq.

  54. 54.

    For an analysis of the Rechtsstaat as a common European principle and its merger with the concept of the rule of law cf. Weber 2010, p. 144 et seq.; Sommermann 2007b.

  55. 55.

    Cf. Sommermann 2014c.

  56. 56.

    Cf. Nicolaidis and Kleinfeld 2012.

  57. 57.

    The term “Schleusenbegriffe” (sluice‐concepts) has been coined by Böckenförde 1969/91, p. 144 et seq. On the “sluice‐function” of European principles see von Bogdandy 2009, p. 22.

  58. 58.

    Cf. Schmidt‐Aßmann 2004, p. 36 et seq., 383 et seq., 388 et seq., 404 et seq.

  59. 59.

    See Möllers 2005, p. 359. On international law aspects concerning transnational administrative activities cf. Kment 2010.

  60. 60.

    For an analysis of the respective authorisation procedures cf. Sydow 2004, p. 168 et seq.; Siegel 2009, p. 232 et seq.

  61. 61.

    Established by Regulation (EC) No 178/2002, O.J. L 31/1 (2002), which led to the creation of corresponding national authorities, thus ensuring a high degree of interoperability between the Member States and the EU. Among the early created national authorities are the Agencia Española de Seguridad Alimentaria y Nutrición in Spain (2001), the Bundesamt für Verbraucherschutz und Lebensmittelsicherheit in Germany (2002) and the Autorità nazionale per la sicurezza alimentare (soon renamed Agenzia nazionale per la sicurezza alimentare) in Italy.

  62. 62.

    See Art. 28 of Pariament/Council Directive 2006/123/EC on services in the internal market (Services Directive), O.J. L 376/36 (2006).

  63. 63.

    See Part I Chap. 3 (§§ 8a–8e) of the Administrative Procedure Act, inserted by Law of 17.7.2009, BGBl. 2009 I, p. 2091.

  64. 64.

    Cf. Kuhlmann and Wollmann 2013, p. 51 et seqq. (with further bibliographical references). For an examination of convergence factors regarding a specific principle of administrative law see Knill and Becker 2003, p. 447–481.

  65. 65.

    See above Sect. 4.1.

  66. 66.

    Cf. Sommermann 2014d, p. 871 et seq.

  67. 67.

    Cf. also the title of the book “Comparative Law as Transnational Law”, Miller and Zumbansen 2012.

  68. 68.

    Cf. Ruffert 2007, p. 7 et seqq.

  69. 69.

    Cf. Weber 2010, p. 10 et seq.; Sommermann 2004, p. 660 et seq.

  70. 70.

    Cf. the distinction of the “method of agreement” and the “method of difference” developed by John Stuart Mill: Mill 1881, Book II Chap. 8.

  71. 71.

    Cf., for instance, Bell 1992; Weber 2003.

  72. 72.

    Cf. Miller and Zumbansem 2012, p. 7: “Comparative law’s enduring problem is the question of whether comparison serves universalizing or particularizing ends; whether function’s abstraction or context’s embeddedness should preoccupy and guide the compartist.” The contrasting classification made by the authors corresponds to the distinction between universalist and culturalist approaches which is used by other authors, cf. Sommermann 2013, p. 205 et seq.

  73. 73.

    Zweigert and Kötz 1996, § 3 II (p. 33 et seq.); Weber 2010, p. 11; Sommermann 1999, p. 1923.

  74. 74.

    Cf. Sommermann 2004, p. 665, 670 et seq.; Hirschl 2014, p. 231 et seq.

  75. 75.

    On the interpretation of national law in conformity with Union law see Weiß 2014, p. 489 et seq., on the interpretation in accordance with international law, in particular international human rights cf. Sommermann 2008b, p. 28 et seq. and 31 et seq.; Knop 2013, p. 209 et seq.

  76. 76.

    Häberle 1989, p. 916.

  77. 77.

    Cf. Sommermann 1997, p. 409 et seq.; Sommermann 2004, p. 654 et seq.

  78. 78.

    Cf. Grosche 2011, p. 287 et seqq.; see already Fuss 1964, p. 946 note 11; Zweigert 1964, p. 611; Bleckmann 1992, p. 29 et seq.

  79. 79.

    Cf. Sommermann 2013, p. 208 et seq.

References

  • Aguila, Y., Kreins, Y., & Warren, A. (2007). La justice administrative en Europe/Administrative justice in Europe. Paris: puf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Auby, J.-B. (Ed.). (2014). Codification of Administrative Procedure. Brussels: Bruylant.

    Google Scholar 

  • Auby, J.-B., & Dutheil de la Rochère, J. (Eds.). (2007). Droit administratif européen. Brussels: Bruylant.

    Google Scholar 

  • Auby, J.B., & Dutheil de la Rochère, J. (Eds.). (2014). Droit administratif européen (2nd edn.). Brussels: Bruylant.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnes, J. (Ed.). (1993a). El procedimiento administrativo en el Derecho comparado. Madrid: Civitas.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnes, J. (Ed.). (1993b). La justicia administrativa en el Derecho comparado. Madrid: Civitas.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, J. S. (1992). Convergences and divergences in European Administrative Law. Rivista italiana di diritto pubblico comunitario, II(1), 3–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernhardt, R. (1964). Eigenheiten und Ziele der Rechtsvergleichung im öffentlichen Recht. ZaöRV, 24(3), 431–452.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blanke, H.-J., & Mangiameli, S. (Eds.). (2013). The Treaty on European Union (TEU) – A Commentary. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bleckmann, A. (1992). Die wertende Rechtsvergleichung bei der Entwicklung europäischer Grundrechte. In J. F. Baur (Ed.), Europarecht, Energierecht, Wirtschaftsrecht. Festschrift für Bodo Börner (pp. 29–37). Cologne: Heymanns.

    Google Scholar 

  • Böckenförde, E.-W. (1969). Entstehung und Wandel des Rechtsstaatsbegriffs. In H. Ehmke, C. Schmid, & H. Scharoun (Eds.), Festschrift für Adolf Arndt (pp. 53–76). Frankfurt a.M.: Europäische Verlagsanstalt. Contained also in E.-W. Böckenförde, Recht, Staat, Freiheit (143–169), Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Bogdandy, A. (2011). Deutsche Rechtswissenschaft im europäischen Rechtsraum. Juristenzeitung, 66(1), 1–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • von Bogdandy, A., & Huber, P. M. (2007). Ius Publicum Europaeum. 5 volumes so far. Heidelberg: C.F. Müller.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Bogdandy, A., & Bast, J. (2009). Europäisches Verfassungsrecht (2nd edn.). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Breining-Kaufmann, C. (2006). Internationales Verwaltungsrecht. Zeitschrift für Schweizerisches Recht, 125(II), 75–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Britz, G. (2006). Vom Europäischen Verwaltungsverbund zum Regulierungsverbund. Europarecht, 41, 46–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cabrillac, R. (2002). Les codifications. Paris: puf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calliess, G.-P., & Maurer, A. (2014). Transnationales Recht – eine Einleitung. In G.-P. Calliess (Ed.), Transnationales Recht (pp. 1–36). Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carré de Malberg, R. (1920). Contribution à la théorie générale de l’État, spécialement d’après les données fournies par le droit constitutionnel français. 2 volumes. Paris: Recueil Sirey.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cassese, S. (2006). Oltre lo Stato. Roma-Bari: Editori Laterza.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chevalier, E. (2014). Bonne administration et Union européenne. Brussels: Bruylant.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chiti, M. P., & Greco, G. (Eds.). (2007). Trattato di diritto amministrativo europeo (2nd edn.). vol. 2 volumes. Milan: Giuffrè.

    Google Scholar 

  • Craig, P. (2006). EU Administrative Law. Oxford: OUP.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • von Danwitz, T. (2008). Europäisches Verwaltungsrecht. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Demmke, C. (2004). European Civil Services between Tradition and Reform. Maastricht: EIPA Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duguit, L. (1913). Les transformations du droit public. Paris: Armand Colin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duguit, L. (1921–25). Traité de droit constitutionnel. 5 volumes. 2nd edn. Paris: Fontemoing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duve, T. (2013). Internationalisierung und Transnationalisierung der Rechtswissenschaft – aus deutscher Perspektive. LOEWE Research Focus “Extrajudicial and judicial Conflict Resolution”, Working Paper No. 6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, U. (1995). Deutsche Rechtsgeschichte (2nd edn.). Munich: C.H. Beck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engel, C. (1992). Die Einwirkungen des europäischen Gemeinschaftsrechts auf das deutsche Verwaltungsrecht. Die Verwaltung, 25, 437–476.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Ombudsman (2005). The European Code of Good Administrative Behaviour. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.

    Google Scholar 

  • Falcon, G. (Ed.). Il diritto amministrativo die paesi europei tra omogeneizzazione e diversità culturali. Padova: CEDAM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fehling, M., & Ruffert, M. (Eds.). (2010). Regulierungsrecht. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferraro, V. (2010). I partenariati pubblico – privati nella prospettiva del diritto europeo. London: Esperia Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fromont, M. (1992). La justice administrative en Europe: convergences. In M. Long (Ed.), Mélanges René Chapus (pp. 197–208). Paris: Montchestien.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fromont, M. (2006). Droit administratif des États européens. Paris: puf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuss, E.-W. (1964). Rechtssatz und Einzelakt im Europäischen Gemeinschaftsrecht. NJW, 17, 1600–1604, 327–331, 945–951

    Google Scholar 

  • Grewe, C., & Ruiz Fabri, H. (1995). Droits constitutionnels européens. Paris: puf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grosche, N. (2011). Rechtsfortbildung im Unionsrecht. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Häberle, P. (1989). Grundrechtsgeltung und Grundrechtsinterpretation im Verfassungsstaat. Juristenzeitung, 44, 913–919.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hauriou, M. (1892). Précis de droit administratif et de droit public. Paris: L. Larose & Forcel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hauriou, M. (1923). Précis de droit constitutionnel. Paris: L. Larose & Forcel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heuschling, L. (2008). Wissenschaft vom Verfassungsrecht: Frankreich. In A.von Bogdandy, P. Cruz Villalón, & P. M. Huber (Eds.), Handbuch Ius Publicum Europaeum 2. Heidelberg: C.F. Müller.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill, H., & Pitschas, R. (Eds.). (2004). Europäisches Verwaltungsverfahrensrecht. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirsch, R. (2014). Comparative Matters – The Renaissance of Comparative Constitutional Law. Oxford: OUP.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hodge, G. A., Greve, C., & Boardman, A. E. (Eds.). (2010). International Handbook on Public-Private Partnerships. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Ihering, R. (1907). Geist des römischen Rechts auf den verschiedenen Stufen seiner Entwicklung (6th edn.). vol. Part I. Leipzig: Breitkopf & Härtel. 1st edn. 1854.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ipsen, H.-P. (1982). Contribution to the discussion. In J. Schwarze (Ed.), Europäisches Verwaltungsrecht im Werden (p. 123). Baden-Baden: Nomos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jèze, G. (1904). Les principes généraux du droit administrative. Paris: Berger-Levrault.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jèze, G. (1914). Les principes généraux du droit administrative (2nd edn.). Paris: Berger-Levrault.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahn-Freund, O. (1974). On Uses and Misuses of Comparative Law. The Modern Law Review, 37(1), 1–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaiser, J. H. (1964). Vergleichung im Öffentlichen Recht. Einleitung. ZaöRV, 24(3), 391–404.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kment, M. (2010). Grenzüberschreitendes Verwaltungshandeln. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knill, C., & Becker, F. (2003). Divergenz trotz Diffusion: Rechtsvergleichende Aspekte des Verhältnismäßigkeitsprinzips in Deutschland, Großbritannien und der Europäischen Union. Die Verwaltung, 36, 447–481.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knop, D. (2013). Völker- und Europarechtsfreundlichkeit als Verfassungsgrundsätze. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.

    Google Scholar 

  • König, K. (2003). On the Typology of Public Administration. Second Braibant Lecture. Brussels: International Institute of Administrative Sciences.

    Google Scholar 

  • König, K. (2008). Moderne Öffentliche Verwaltung. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.

    Google Scholar 

  • König, K., Kropp, S., Kuhlmann, S., Reichard, C., Sommermann, K.-P., & Ziekow, J. (Eds.). (2014). Grundmuster der Verwaltungskultur. Baden-Baden: Nomos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhlmann, S., & Wollmann, H. (2013). Verwaltung und Verwaltungsreformen in Europa. Wiesbaden: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lerg, C. A. (2011). Amerika als Argument. Die deutsche Amerika-Forschung im Vormärz und ihre politische Deutung in der Revolution von 1848/49. Bielefeld: transcript Verlag.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • von Liszt, F. (1902). Das Völkerrecht (2nd edn.). Berlin: Haering.

    Google Scholar 

  • Magiera, S., & Siedentopf, H. (Eds.). (1994). Das Recht des öffentlichen Dienstes in den Mitgliedstaaten der Europäischen Gemeinschaft. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marcou, G. (Ed.). (1995). Les mutations du droit de l’administration en Europe – pluralisme et convergence. Paris: l’Harmattan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Masing, J. & Marcou, G. (Eds.). Unabhängige Regulierungsbehörden. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, F. F. (1862). Grundsätze des Verwaltungs-Rechts mit besonderer Rücksicht auf gemeinsames deutsches Recht, sowie auf neuere Gesetzgebung und bemerkenswerte Entscheidungen der Obersten Behörden zunächst der Königreiche Preußen, Baiern und Württemberg. Tübingen: Laupp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, O. (1886). Theorie des französischen Verwaltungsrechts. Strassburg: Karl J. Trübner.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, O. (1914). Deutsches Verwaltungsrecht, vol. 1 (2nd. edn.). München/Leipzig: Duncker & Humblot.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merten, D., & Papier, H. J. (Eds.). (2004). Handbuch der Grundrechte in Deutschland und Europa vol. 7 volumes so far. Heidelberg: C.F. Müller.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mill, J. S. (1881). A System of Logic (8th edn.). New York: Harper & Brothers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, R. A., & Zumbansen, P. C. (Eds.). (2012). Comparative Law as Transnational Law. Oxford: OUP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Möllers, C. (2005). Transnationale Behördenkooperation – Verfassungs- und völkerrechtliche Probleme transnationaler administrativer Standardsetzung. ZaöRV, 65, 351–389.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mörth, U. (2008). European Public-private Collaboration: A Choice between Efficiency and Democratic Accountability? Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohl, R. (1824). Das Bundes-Staatsrecht der Vereinigten Staaten von Nordamerika. Stuttgart: Cotta.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohl, R. (1836). Amerikanisches Staatsrecht. Kritische Zeitschrift für Rechtswissenschaft und Gesetzgebung des Auslandes, 8, 359–386.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohl, R. (1844). Entwickelung der Demokratie in Nordamerika und in der Schweiz. Kritische Zeitschrift für Rechtswissenschaft und Gesetzgebung des Auslandes, 16, 275–310.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohl, R. (1855–56–58). Die Geschichte und Literatur der Staatswissenschaften. 3 volumes, Erlangen: Ferdinand Enke (Reprint Graz: Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt, 1960).

    Google Scholar 

  • Neumeyer, K. (1910, 1922, 1926/30, 1936). Internationales Verwaltungsrecht, 4 volumes, München: Verlag für Recht und Gesellschaft.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nguyen, M. S. (2006). Droit administratif international. Zeitschrift für Schweizerisches Recht (ZSR), 125(II), 75–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicolaidis, K., & Kleinfeld, R. (2012). Rethinking Europe’s “Rule of Law” and Enlargement Agenda: The Fundamental Dilemma. SIGMA Paper, vol. No. 49. Paris: OECD.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Nußberger, A. (2012). Europäische Menschenrechtskonvention. In J. Isensee, & P. Kirchhof (Eds.), Handbuch des Staatsrechts der Bundesrepublik Deutschland 3rd edn. (vol. X, pp. 135–171). Heidelberg: C.F. Müller.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orlando, V. E. (1891). Principii di diritto amministrativo. Florence: Barbèra.

    Google Scholar 

  • Romano, S. (1901). Principii di diritto amministrativo italiano. Milan: Società editrice libraria.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruffert, M. (2007). The Transformation of Administrative Law as a Transnational Methodological Project. In M. Ruffert (Ed.), The Transformation of Administrative Law in Europe/La mutation du droit administrative en Europe (pp. 3–52). Munich: Sellier.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Savigny, F.C. (1814). Vom Beruf unserer Zeit für Gesetzgebung und Rechtswissenschaft. Heidelberg: Mohr und Zimmer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scheuner, U. (1963). Der Einfluss des französischen Verwaltungsrechts auf die deutsche Rechtsentwicklung. DÖV, 16(19–20), 714–719.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt-Aßmann, E. (2004). Das Allgemeine Verwaltungsrecht als Ordnungsidee (2nd edn.). Berlin et al.: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt-Aßmann, E. (2006). Die Herausforderung der Verwaltungsrechtswissenschaft durch die Internationalisierung der Verwaltungsbeziehungen. Der Staat, 45, 317–348.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwarze, J. (Ed.). (1982). Europäisches Verwaltungsrecht im Werden. Baden-Baden: Nomos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwarze, J. (1988). Europäisches Verwaltungsrecht. 2 volumes. Baden-Baden: Nomos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwarze, J. (1992). European Administrative Law. London: Sweet and Maxwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwarze, J. (2005). Europäisches Verwaltungsrecht. 2 volumes (2nd edn.). Baden-Baden: Nomos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siedentopf, H., & Speer, B. (2002). Europäischer Verwaltungsraum oder Europäische Verwaltungsgemeinschaft? – Gemeinschaftsrechtliche und funktionelle Anforderungen an die öffentlichen Verwaltungen in den EU-Mitgliedstaaten. DÖV, 28, 753–763.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siegel, T. (2009). Entscheidungsfindung im Verwaltungsverbund. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siegel, T. (2012). Europäisierung des Öffentlichen Rechts. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sommermann, K.-P. (1991). Europäisches Verwaltungsrecht oder Europäisierung des Verwaltungsrechts? DVBl., 111(16), 889–898.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sommermann, K.-P. (1997). Staatsziele und Staatszielbestimmungen. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sommermann, K.-P. (1999). Die Bedeutung der Rechtsvergleichung für die Fortentwicklung des Staats- und Verwaltungsrechts in Europa. DÖV, 52(24), 1017–1029.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sommermann, K.-P. (2002). Konvergenzen im Verwaltungsverfahrens- und Verwaltungsprozessrecht europäischer Staaten. DÖV, 55(4), 133–143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sommermann, K.-P. (2004). Funktionen und Methoden der Grundrechtsvergleichung. In D. Merten, & H.-J. Papier (Eds.), Handbuch der Grundrechte (vol. 1, pp. 631–678). Heidelberg: C.F. Müller.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sommermann, K.-P. (2007a). Europäisches Verwaltungsrecht als „die großartigste Rechtsbildung der Weltgeschichte“? – Die Vision von Lorenz von Stein aus heutiger Perspektive. DÖV, 60(20), 859–867.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sommermann, K.-P. (2007b). Entwicklungsperspektiven des Rechtsstaates: Europäisierung und Internationalisierung eines staatsrechtlichen Leitbegriffs. In S. Magiera, & K.-P. Sommermann (Eds.), Freiheit, Rechtsstaat und Sozialstaat in Europa (pp. 75–90). Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sommermann, K.-P. (2008a). Veränderungen des nationalen Verwaltungsrechtes unter europäischem Einfluss. In J. Schwarze (Ed.), Bestand und Perspektiven des Europäischen Verwaltungsrechts (pp. 181–199). Baden-Baden: Nomos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sommermann, K.-P. (2008b). Offene Staatlichkeit: Deutschland. In A.von Bogdandy, P. Cruz Villalón, & P. M. Huber (Eds.), Handbuch Ius Publicum Europaeum (vol. II, pp. 3–35). Heidelberg: C.F. Müller.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sommermann, K.-P. (2013). Erkenntnisinteressen der Rechtsvergleichung im Verwaltungsrecht. In A. Gamper, & B. Verschraegen (Eds.), Rechtsvergleichung als juristische Auslegungsmethode (pp. 195–210). Vienna: Jan Sramek Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sommermann, K.-P. (2014a). Towards a Common European Administrative Culture?. In K. König, S. Kropp, C. Reichard, K.-P. Sommermann, & J. Ziekow (Eds.), Grundmuster der Verwaltungskultur (pp. 605–630). Baden-Baden: Nomos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sommermann, K.-P. (2014b). Die gemeinsamen Werte der Union und der Mitgliedstaaten. In M. Niedobitek (Ed.), Europarecht – Grundlagen der Union (pp. 287–320). Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sommermann, K.-P. (2014c). Some Reflections on the Concept of Solidarity and its Transformation into a Legal Principle. Archiv des Völkerrechts, 52, 10–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sommermann, K.-P. (2014d). Prinzipien des Verwaltungsrechts. In A.von Bogdandy, S. Cassese, & P. M. Huber (Eds.), Handbuch Ius Publicum Europaeum (vol. V, pp. 863–892). Heidelberg: C.F. Müller.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sordi, B. (2010). Rechtsstaat and the Rule of law: Historical reflections on the emergence of administrative law in Europe. In S. Rose-Ackerman, & P. L. Lindseth (Eds.), Comparative Administrative Law (pp. 23–36). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Stein, L. (1870). Handbuch der Verwaltungslehre und des Verwaltungsrechts. Stuttgart: Cotta. newly edited by U. Schliesky, Tübingen: Mohr, 2010

    Google Scholar 

  • von Stein, L. (1882). Einige Bemerkungen über das internationale Verwaltungsrecht. Jahrbuch für Gesetzgebung Verwaltung und Volkswirthschaft, 6, 396–442.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stolleis, M. (1992). Geschichte des öffentlichen Rechts in Deutschland vol. 2. Munich: C.H. Beck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strebel, H. (1964). Vergleichung und vergleichende Methode im öffentlichen Recht. ZaöRV, 24(3), 405–430.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sydow, G. (2004). Verwaltungskooperation in der Europäischen Union. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tietje, C. (2001). Internationalisiertes Verwaltungshandeln. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ule, C., Becker, F., & König, K. (Eds.). (1967). Verwaltungsverfahrensgesetze des Auslandes. 2 volumes. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.

    Google Scholar 

  • Viellechner, L. (2014). Was heißt Transnationalität im Recht?. In G.-P. Calliess (Ed.), Transnationales Recht (pp. 57–76). Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber, A. (Ed.). (2001). Fundamental Rights in Europe and North America (Leaflet). The Hague: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber, A. (2003). Notes sur la justice constitutionnelle comparée: convergences et divergences. Annuaire international de justice constitutionnelle, 19, 29–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber, A. (2010). Europäische Verfassungsvergleichung. Munich: Beck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiß, W. (2014). Unionsrecht und nationales Recht. In M. Niedobitek (Ed.), Europarecht – Grundlagen der Union (pp. 393–501). Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiesinger, N. (2013). Innovation im Verwaltungsrecht durch Internationalisierung. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zemanek, K. (1964). Was kann die Vergleichung staatlichen öffentlichen Rechts für das Recht der internationalen Organisationen leisten? ZaöRV, 24(3), 453–471.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zweigert, K. (1964). Der Einfluss des europäischen Gemeinschaftsrechts auf die Rechtsordnungen der Mitgliedstaaten. Rabels Zeitschrift, 28, 601–643.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zweigert, K., & Kötz, H. (1996). Einführung in die Rechtsvergleichung (3rd edn.). Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. German University of Administrative Sciences Speyer, Speyer, Germany

    Prof. Dr. Karl-Peter Sommermann

Authors
  1. Prof. Dr. Karl-Peter Sommermann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty for Economics, Law and Social Sc, University of Erfurt, Erfurt, Germany

    Hermann-Josef Blanke

  2. Court of Justice of the European Union, Luxembourg, Luxembourg

    Pedro Cruz Villalón

  3. University of Applied Sciences for Administration and Public Management in the State of Lower Saxony, Hannover, Germany

    Tonio Klein

  4. Università di Pavia, Pavia, Italy

    Jacques Ziller

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Sommermann, KP. (2015). Objectives and Methods of a Transnational Science of Administrative Law. In: Blanke, HJ., Cruz Villalón, P., Klein, T., Ziller, J. (eds) Common European Legal Thinking. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-19300-7_30

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation