Review of European Administrative Law (REALaw)

Prijzen en abonneren
Jaarabonnementen

Voor meer dan 20 werknemers, neem contact met ons op. Bovenstaande prijzen zijn inclusief BTW.

EDITORIAL BOARD

General Editor:

Mariolina Eliantonio

Professor of European and Comparative Administrative Law and Procedure, Maastricht University

 

Managing Editor:

Danai Petropoulou Ionescu

PhD Candidate, Maastricht University

 

Senior Editors:

Delphine Costa

Professor of Public Law, University of Aix-Marseille

 

Luca de Lucia

Full Professor of Administrative Law, University of Salerno

 

Yseult Marique

Professor, University of Essex

 

Sacha Prechal

Judge at the Court of Justice of the European Union; Honorary Professor in European Law, Utrecht University

 

Jane Reichel

Professor of Administrative Law, Stockholm University 

 

Stéphanie De Somer

Associate Professor, University of Antwerp and Of counsel at Van Olmen & Wynant, Brussels

 

Annalisa Volpato

Assistant Professor of European Law, University of Padova

 

Rob Widdershoven

Professor of European Administrative Law at the Department of Law, Utrecht University

 

Ferdinand Wollenschläger

Professor of Public Law, European Law and Public Economic Law, Augsburg University

 

General Editor of the REALaw blog

Yseult Marique

 

 

ADVISORY BOARD

Jean-Bernard Auby
Tom Barkhuysen
Roberto Caranta
Michael Dougan
Xavier Groussot
Chris J. Hilson
Herwig C.H. Hofmann

Luis Arroyo Jimenez
Petra Lea Láncos
Päivi S. M. Leino-Sandberg
Nina Poltorak
Matthias Ruffert
Lamprini Xenou

Editorial Contact

Danai Petropoulou Ionescu, Managing Editor
Department of Public Law, Maastricht University
P.O. Box 616
6200 MD Maastricht
The Netherlands
realaw@maastrichtuniversity.nl 

Submission

 

REALaw publishes scientific articles, book reviews and case law analyses. Articles should not be longer than 10,000 words including footnotes. Book reviews and case notes should be between 2,000 and 6,000 words (including footnotes).

 

When submitting a contribution, please follow the most recent version of the OSCOLA manual of citation. Please also make sure to follow our formatting guidelines.

 

The decision to accept a contribution to REALaw is based on the high quality of the contribution, its innovative character and ability to contribute to existing scholarship in the field of European and Comparative Administrative Law. Decisions to publish are based on double-blind peer-review. The review publishes in accordance with publication ethics guidelines.

 

The Editorial board does not send papers for review that do not fall into the scope of the journal, do not comply with the editorial guidelines, or have been published or are under review elsewhere.

 

Prospective authors can discuss the relevance of their papers with the Editorial Board before submitting their article. The journal welcomes expressions of interest from authors and publishers wishing to submit review copies.

 

For information on copyright ownership see 'Rights and permissions'. After two years from publication, contributions automatically become open access on our website. Immediate open access can be requested upon payment of a fee.

 

The Review of European and Administrative Law does not require a submission fee.

 

For submissions and inquiries please contact the Managing Editor of the Review of European Administrative Law at realaw@maastrichtuniversity.nl . 

 

Peer Review Process

 

All content published in REALaw is subject to a peer review process. Articles can be submitted by authors by the means indicated on the website. After submitting their article, authors receive a confirmation that the article has been received and are informed as soon as possible as to whether the article will be submitted to peer-review.

 

The managing editor is responsible for submitting the article to the Editorial Board, which can decide to reject it (desk rejection) if it  does not fall within the scope of the journal, does not comply with the editorial guidelines, or has been published or is under review elsewhere.

 

Articles and case law analyses are subject to a double-blind peer review process. Peer review for articles and case law analyses is conducted by at least two referees, which may be from the Editorial Board, the Advisory Board and/or the broader academic community. One referee is always external to the Editorial Board. Book reviews are peer-reviewed by one referee from the Editorial Board. All referees are selected on the basis of their expertise and familiarity with the topic at hand.

 

Upon accepting the assignment, the referee will strive to assess the author's contribution within a period of 4-6 weeks. In case of delays in the process, the author(s) will be duly notified.

 

The referee's assessment will be based on the assessment form approved by the Editorial Board, which the referee will submit to the managing editor via e-mail. The article may be accepted or considered acceptable with minor or major revisions, may be reconsidered after revision and resubmission, or rejected. If the referee suggests to ‘revise and resubmit’ the article, the article is subject to new assessment after the resubmission.

 

The main criteria for acceptance relate to the quality of the manuscript with regard to the state of knowledge in the field of European and/or comparative administrative law as well as to the article’s academic contribution to the field.

 

Open Access Policy

 

For information on copyright ownership see 'Rights and permissions'.

 

Access to the journal is available upon subscription and/or payment of a fee. Please consult the page on prices and subscription for more information.

 

The Review of European and Administrative Law does not require a submission fee.

 

After two years from publication, contributions automatically become open access on our website. Immediate open access can be requested upon payment of a fee.

 

Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

 

The Review of European Administrative Law (REALaw) is committed to maintaining the highest level of integrity in the content published and its editorial process.

 

REALaw is a member of, and subscribes to the principles of, the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) www.publicationethics.org. REALaw editors operate in alignment with the Code of Conduct for Journal Editors developed by COPE, which provides a forum for publishers and editors of scientific journals to discuss issues relating to the integrity of the work submitted to or published in their journals.

 

We encourage the best standards of publication ethics and take all possible measures against publication malpractices. Anyone who believes that these guidelines have not been followed should raise their concern with the managing editor or send an email to info@parislegalpublishers.com.

 

 

Duties and responsibilities of editors

 

Editorial Board

 

The members of the Editorial Board are recognized experts in the field of European and comparative administrative law. They are members of or affiliated with universities and research institutes from across Europe. The full names, biographies, and affiliations of the members and the contact information for the editorial board can be found on the journal's website.

 

 

Confidentiality

 

The editors will not disclose any information about a submitted article to anyone other than the author, other members of the Editorial Board, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher.

 

 

Peer review process

 

All content published in REALaw is subject to a peer review process. Articles can be submitted by authors by the means indicated on the website. After submitting their article, authors receive a confirmation that the article has been received and are informed as soon as possible as to whether the article will be submitted to peer-review.

 

The managing editor is responsible for submitting the article to the Editorial Board, which can decide to reject it (desk rejection) if it  does not fall within the scope of the journal, does not comply with the editorial guidelines, or has been published or is under review elsewhere.

 

Articles and case law analyses are subject to a double-blind peer review process. Peer review for articles and case law analyses is conducted by at least two referees, which may be from the Editorial Board, the Advisory Board and/or the broader academic community. One referee is always external to the Editorial Board. Book reviews are peer-reviewed by one referee from the Editorial Board. All referees are selected on the basis of their expertise and familiarity with the topic at hand.

 

 

Disclosure and conflict of interest

 

Conflict of interest exists when an editor has financial or personal relationships that inappropriately influence (bias) their actions. Such relationships are also known as dual commitments, competing interests, or competing loyalties.

 

Editors who make final decisions about manuscripts have no personal, professional, or financial involvement in any of the issues they might judge. Should editors submit their own manuscripts for consideration, the journal shall ensure that they are not involved in the decision-making and review process, and all information regarding their manuscripts is kept confidential. All participants in the peer-review and publication process must disclose all relationships that could be viewed as potential conflicts of interest.

 

Editors require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication.

 

Editors will not use unpublished information disclosed in a submitted article for their own research purposes without the author's explicit written consent. Privileged information or ideas obtained by editors as a result of handling the article will be kept confidential and not used for their personal advantage.

 

 

Publication decisions

 

The General Editors and the Managing Editor are responsible for deciding which of the submitted articles will be published, based on the validation of the article, its importance to researchers and readers, its quality with regard to the state of knowledge in the field of European and/or comparative administrative law, the reviewers' comments, and such legal requirements as are currently in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The Managing Editor and the General Editors may confer with other members of the Editorial Board or reviewers when making this decision.

 

 

Procedures for dealing with unethical behaviour

 

Editors (in conjunction with the publisher) will take responsive measures when ethical concerns are raised with regard to a submitted article or published paper. Every reported act of unethical publishing behaviour will be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication. Editors will follow the COPE flowcharts when dealing with cases of suspected misconduct. In any event, the author should be given the opportunity to respond to any allegations. If, on investigation, the ethical concern is well-founded, a correction, retraction, expression of concern or another note as may be relevant, will be published in the journal.

 

 

Duties and responsibilities of reviewers

  

Confidentiality

 

All articles received for review are confidential documents and must be treated as such; they must not be shown to or discussed with others except if authorized by the managing editor (who would only do so under exceptional and specific circumstances). This applies also to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation.

 

 

Conflict of interest

 

Conflict of interest exists when a reviewer has financial or personal relationships that inappropriately influence (bias) their actions. Such relationships are also known as dual commitments, competing interests, or competing loyalties.

 

Any invited referee who has conflicts of interest should immediately notify the editors to declare their conflicts of interest and decline the invitation to review.

 

 

Promptness

 

Any invited referee who feels unqualified to review the article or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Managing Editor and decline the invitation to review.

 

 

Acknowledgements of sources

 

Reviewers should notify the editors of any substantial similarity or overlap between the article under consideration and any other manuscript (published or unpublished) known to them.

 

  

Duties and responsibilities of authors

 

Conflict of interest

 

Conflict of interest exists when an author (or the author's institution) has financial or personal relationships that inappropriately influence (bias) their actions. Such relationships are also known as dual commitments, competing interests, or competing loyalties.

 

When authors submit a manuscript, whether an article or another publication, they are responsible for disclosing all financial and personal relationships that might bias their work. Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest stage possible. Readers should be informed about who has funded research and on the role of the funders in the research.

 

Submitting the same manuscript to more than one publisher, or even to more than one publication at the same publisher, without full disclosure is not deemed acceptable.

 

 

Plagiarism

 

Authors should ensure that they only submit entirely original works, and if they have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited. REALaw does not tolerate plagiarism in any form and reserves the right to check all submissions through appropriate plagiarism checking tools. Submissions containing suspected plagiarism will be rejected.

 

 

Fundamental errors in published articles

 

When authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their own published article, it is their obligation to promptly notify the journal's editors or publisher and cooperate with them to either correct the article in the form of an erratum or to retract the article. If the editor or publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error or inaccuracy, then it is the authors' obligation to promptly correct or retract the article or provide evidence to the journal editors of the correctness of the article.

 

 

Research fraud

 

The journal is committed to combat research fraud and preserve research integrity. Research fraud refers to publications that report results and draw conclusions from data that are not generated by the study (fabrication) or are generated by manipulating the data (falsification). These offences are also applicable to images that are modified to conceal the truth.

 

 

Duties and responsibilities of the publisher

 

Handling of unethical publishing behaviour

 

In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication or plagiarism, the publisher, in close collaboration with the editors, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and to amend the article in question. This includes the prompt publication of an erratum, clarification or, in the most severe case, the retraction of the affected work. The publisher, together with the editors, shall take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred, and under no circumstances encourage such misconduct or knowingly allow such misconduct to take place.

 

 

Access to journal content

The publisher is committed to the permanent availability and preservation of scholarly research and ensures accessibility by partnering with organizations and maintaining a digital archive.