Michal Bobek is Professor of European Law at the College of Europe. Formerly Anglo-German Fellow at the Institute of European and Comparative Law, University of Oxford, he remains associated with the Institute. He qualified as judge in the Czech Republic and worked as legal secretary to the President of the Supreme Administrative Court, where he also headed the Research and Documentation Department of the Court.

Studying the comparative reasoning of courts judicial dialogues has been one of the more fashionable topics in legal academia over the past decade. Bobek's book is a valuable contribution to the study of this topic, fact-checking the practice of judicial comparisons through a study of supreme court decisions in England and Wales, France, Germany, the Czech Republic and Slovakia...the book provides a well-researched and realistic account of the reality of comparative law in national Supreme Courts.

• CONCLUSIONS

Michal Bobek is Professor of European Law at the College of Europe. Formerly Anglo-German Fellow at the Institute of European and Comparative Law, University of Oxford, he remains associated with the Institute. He qualified as judge in the Czech Republic and worked as legal secretary to the President of the Supreme Administrative Court, where he also headed the Research and Documentation Department of the Court.

Studying the comparative reasoning of courts judicial dialogues has been one of the more fashionable topics in legal academia over the past decade. Bobek's book is a valuable contribution to the study of this topic, fact-checking the practice of judicial comparisons through a study of supreme court decisions in England and Wales, France, Germany, the Czech Republic and Slovakia...the book provides a well-researched and realistic account of the reality of comparative law in national Supreme Courts.

• CONCLUSIONS

Michal Bobek is Professor of European Law at the College of Europe. Formerly Anglo-German Fellow at the Institute of European and Comparative Law, University of Oxford, he remains associated with the Institute. He qualified as judge in the Czech Republic and worked as legal secretary to the President of the Supreme Administrative Court, where he also headed the Research and Documentation Department of the Court.

Studying the comparative reasoning of courts judicial dialogues has been one of the more fashionable topics in legal academia over the past decade. Bobek's book is a valuable contribution to the study of this topic, fact-checking the practice of judicial comparisons through a study of supreme court decisions in England and Wales, France, Germany, the Czech Republic and Slovakia...the book provides a well-researched and realistic account of the reality of comparative law in national Supreme Courts.

• CONCLUSIONS