الف) کتاب‌ها
- شمس، عبدالله (۱۳۹۶)، آیین دادرسی مدنی دورة پیشرفته، چ چهلم، تهران: دراک.
- مرادی برلیان، مهدی (۱۳۹۲)، اصل تناسب در نظام حقوقی اتحادیة اروپایی با نگاهی به آرای دیوان عدالت اداری ایران، تهران: خرسندی.
- مرکز مطبوعات و انتشارات قوة قضاییه (۱۳۹۶)، مجموعه تنقیح‌شده قوانین و مقررات حقوقی کاربردی، ج 5، چ دوم، تهران.
ب) مقالات
- رجب، محمدعلی (۱۳۹۶)، «اصل تناسب تأمین و جایگاه آن در نظام دادرسی کیفری ایران»، مجلة حقوقی دادگستری، ش ۹۸.
- رستمی، ولی (۱۳۹۵)، «نقد و بررسی دیدگاه‌های کاربرد اصل تناسب در نظارت قضایی ایران»، فصلنامة تخصصی دین و قانون، ش ۱۲.
- زارعی، محمدحسین (۱۳۹۳)، «مفهوم و جایگاه اصل تناسب در حقوق اداری با نگاه ویژه به نظام حقوقی اتحادیة اروپایی»، مجلة تحقیقات حقوقی، ش ۶۶.
- سبزواری‌نژاد، حجت (۱۳۹۶)، «جایگاه اصل تناسب جرم و مجازات در حقوق کیفری ایران و انگلستان»، دوفصلنامة علمی-پژوهشی دیدگاه‌های حقوق قضایی، ش ۷۷ و ۷۸.
- انگلیسی
- A) Books
- Bucheler, Gebhard (2015), Proportionality in Investor-state Arbitration, London, Oxford University Press.
- Brady, Alan D.P., (2012), Proportionality and Deference under the UK Human Rights, London, Cambridge University Press.
- Burke -White, William; Staden, Andereas Von, (2010), “The Need for Public Law Standards of Review in Investor-State Arbitration”, in International Investment Law and Comparative Public Law, Edited by: Stephan W. Schill, London, Oxford University Press.
- Henckels, Caroline, (2015), Proportionality and Deference in Investor-State Arbitration, London, Cambridge University Press.
- Kingsbury, Benedict & Schill, W. Stephan (2010), “Public Law Concepts to Balance Investors' Rights with State Regulatory Actions in the Public Interest - The Concept of Proportionality”, in S Schill (ed), International Investment Law and ComparativePublic Law, London, Oxford University Press.
- Knahr, Christina & Koller, Christian (2010), Investment and Commercial Arbitration- Similarities and Divergences, Eleven International Pubishing.
- Kotuby Jr, Charles T., Sobota, Luke A., (2017), General Principles of Law and International Due Process, Oxford University Press.
- Reinisch, August (2010), Netherlands Yearbook of International Law, Vol.41.
- Shaw QC, Malcolm N., (2006), International Law, Cambrdge University Press, Sixth Edition.
- Urbina, Francisco J., (2017), Critique of Proportionality and Balancing, Cambridge Uneversity Press.
- Vadi, Valentina (2018), Proportionality, Reasonableness and Standard of Review in International Investment Law and Arbitration, Edward Elgar Publishing.
- B) Articles
- Bruke-White, William W., and A. von, Staden (2010), “Private Litigation in Public Law Sphere: The Standard of Review in Investor-State rbitration”, Yale Journal of International Law, Vol. 35.
- Calamita, N.Jansen; (2013-2014),“The Principal of Proportionality and the Problem of Indeterminacy in International Investment Treaties”, in Yearbook on International Investment Law and Policy.
- Carter, Anne, (2016) “Proportionality in Australian Constitutional Law: Towards Transnationalism?”, ZaöRV, Vol.76, pp. 951-966.
- Cottier, Thomas and others, (2012), “The Principle of Proportionality in International Law”, nccr trade regulation, Swiss National Center of Competence Research, Working paper No. 2012/38. pp. 1-34.
- Fish, Morris J., (2008), “An Eye for an Eye: Proportionality as a Moral Principle of Punishment”, Oxford Journal of Leal Studies,Vol. 28.
- Frank, Thomas M., (2008), “On Proportionality of Countermeasure in International Law”, The American Journal of International Law, Vol. 102, No. 4, pp. 715-767.
- Gazzini, Tarcisio, “General Principles of Law in the Field of Foreign Investment” (2009), The Journal of World Investment & Trade, Vol. 10, No.1.
- Hilf, Meinhard, (2001), “Power, Rules and Principle- Which Orientation for WTO/GATT Law?” Journal of International Economic Law, 111-130.
- Hirsch, Moshe, (2011), “Sorces of International Investment Law”, Interational Law Association Study Group in the Role of Soft Law Instruments in Investment Law, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1892564.
- Jackson, Viki. C, (2015), “Constitutional Law in an Age of Proportionality”, Yale Law Journal, Vol. 124, Issue 8.
- Kolb, Robert,(2006), “Principles as Sources Of International Law (With Special Reference To Good Faith), Netherlands International Law Review, LIII: 1-36.
- Mitchell, Andrew D., (2007), “Proportionality and Remedies in WTO Disputes”, European Journal on International Law, Vol. 17, No. 5.
- Ranjan, Prabhash (2014), “Using the public Law Concept of Proportionality to Balance Investment Protection with Regulation in International Investment Law: A Critical Appraisal”, Cambridge Journal of International and Comparative Law, Vol.3, Issue 3.
- Rivers, Julian, “Proportionality and Variable Intensity of Review” (2006) 65, Cambridge LJ 174-207.
- Schill, Stephan.W, (2011), “Enhancing International Investment Law’s Legitimacy: Conceptual and Methodological Foundations of a New Public Law Approach”, Virginia Jornal of International Law, Vol.52.
- Schlesinger, Rudolf, “Reasearch on the General Principles of Law Recognized by Civilized Nations”, (1957), Vol.51, American Journal of International Law.
- Vadi, Valentina, (2015), “the migration of constitutional ideas to regional and international economic law: the case of proportionality”, Northwestern Journal of International Law and Busines, Vol.24.
- C) Votes
- Brazil-Measures Affecting Imports of Retreeated Tyres’, AB-2007-4, Report of the Appellate Body, WT/DS332/AB/R, 3 December 2007.
- European Communities- Measures Affecting Asbestos and Asbestos Containing Products, Appellate Body Report, WT/DS135/AB/R, 12 March 2001.
- Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America), Judgment, Merits, 27 June 1986, ICJ Reports 1986.
- CMS Gas Transmission Company v. The Republic of Argentina, ICSID Case No. ARB/01/8, 2005.
- Coleman v Power, High Court of Australia, HCA 39, Judgment, 1 September 2004.
- Delimitation of the Maritime Boundary between Bangladesh and Myanmar in the Bay of Bengal, International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, Judgement, Case No.16, 2012.
- Handyside v. The United Kingdom, ECHR, 7 December 1976.
- Ahmed and Others v. the United Kingdom – 22954/93, ECHR, 2 September 1998.
- Huang v Secretary of State for the Home Department, UK House of Lords 11. 21 March 2007.
- Hermann Schräder HS Kraftfutter GmbH & Co. KG v Hauptzollamt Gronau, Case C-265/87, Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber), 11 July 1989.
- Lange v Australian Broadcasting Corporation, High Court of Australia, 1997.
- Korea-Measures Affecting Imports of Fresh Chilled and Frozen Beef, , Appellate Body Report WT/DS161/AB/R,11 December 2000;
- LG&E Energy Corp. v. Agrentine Republic, Decision on Liability, ICSID Case No ARB/02/1, 3 October 2006.
- Maritime Delimitation in The Black Sea (Romania V. Ukraine), Judgment, ICJ reports, 3 February 2009.
- McCloy v New South Wales, Australian High Court’s Judgement, 7 October 2015.
- North Sea Continental Shelf (Germany v. Denmark, Germany v. Netherlands), Judgment, ICJ, 20 February 1969.
- Omega Spielhallen- und Automatenaufstellungs-GmbH v Oberbürgermeisterin der Bundesstadt Bonn, ECR Judgement, Case C-36/02, 2004.
- PL Holdings S.à.r.l. v. Republic of Poland, SCC Case No. V 2014/163, 2017.
- R (F) (Respondents) v. Secretary of State for the Home Department (Appellant), UK Supreme Court 17, Judgment, 21 April 2010.
- R. v. Oakes v David Edwin Oakes, Supreme Court of Canada, 1 S.C.R. 103, 28 Februrary 1986.
- The Queen v. Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food ex Parte Fedesa, ECJ, Case C-331/88, 1990.
- Thailand - Restrictions on Importation of and Internal Taxes on Cigarettes, (DS10/R - 37S/200), Report of the Panel dated 5 October 1990.
- United States – Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products (US – Shrimp), Appellate Body Report, WT/DS58/AB/R, 6 November 1998.
|
