The overview is organized in two parts. First part is a brief overview of the content of a written judgment in eight countries under study: Austria, England, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Ireland, Norway, and Spain. The second part is an overview of levels of legal requirements for the countries in this study. The brief is based on desk research conducted in August 2019, with the input and feedbackfrom country experts. The research is based on the legislation in force as of September 2019 (where possible, reference is made to the translations of legislation), as well as existing literature
Aarnio, A. (1983). Argumentation theory and beyond: Some remarks on the rationality of legal justification. Rechtstheorie, 14(4): 385-400.
Anderson, B. (2013). Weighing and Balancing in the Light of Deliberation and Expression. In C. Dahlman and E. Feteris (Eds.) Legal Argumentation Theory: Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives (pp. 113–23). Dordrecht, NL: Springer Netherlands.
Bernal, C. (2013). Legal Argumentation and the Normativity of Legal Norms. In C. Dahlman & E. Feteris (Eds.), Legal Argumentation Theory: Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives (pp. 103–112). Dordrecht, NL: Springer Netherlands.
Burns, K., Pösö, T. & Skivenes, M. (Eds.) (2017) Child Welfare Removals by the State. A Cross-Country Analysis of Decision-Making Systems. Oxford University Press.
Spaak, T. (2003). Legal Positivism, Law’s Normativity, and the Normative Force of Legal Justification. Ratio Juris 16(4): 469–85.