Pavlos Eleftheriadis is Professor of Public Law at the University of Oxford. 

He has been a Fellow of Mansfield College, Oxford since 2003.  He teaches European Union law, constitutional law and jurisprudence. He was educated at the University of Athens (BA, 1990) and the University of Cambridge (LLM, 1991, PhD, 1995).

He is a barrister in England and Wales and practises before the English courts in public law, environmental law, EU law and human rights from Francis Taylor Building in the Temple. Some of his recent cases involved challenging the Brexit process on constitutional grounds, including the challenge to the legitimacy of the EU referendum on account of the violation of electoral law by the ‘Leave’ campaigns, in the case of Wilson v Prime Minister [2019] EWCA Civ 304.  

He is the author of Legal Rights (Oxford University Press, 2008), where he argues for an interpretive or hermeneutic theory of law and rights and offers a theory of fundamental rights based on Kant and Rawls. His book A Union of Peoples: Europe as a Community of Principle was published by Oxford University Press in April 2020. In that book he applies the same interpretive theory of law to European Union law and transnational law and argues that the European Union's central values are not those of a federal constitution, but the internationalist values of 'accountability', 'liberty' and 'fairness'. He is also the author of many other essays in public law, jurisprudence and European Union law. He is the co-editor (with Julie Dickson) of the collection of essays The Philosophical Foundations of European Union Law (Oxford University Press, 2012). 

He has been a visiting professor of law at Columbia Law School (2001), a visiting scholar at the University of Toronto (2012), and a Distinguished Global Fellow in Residence at Boston College (2013).

He regularly blogs on European, constitutional and legal issues. Some of his recent articles are: 

'A New Referendum is a Constitutional Requirement' Oxford Business Law Blog, 04 July 2016.

'A Second Referendum is Probably Legally Required' InFacts, 06 July 2016

'How the Government Lost the Article 50 Case',  InFacts, 27 January 2017

 'The Elegant Way of the Constitution' Solicitors Journal, 21 February 2017

'EU Financial Claims Against the EU are Enforceable', InFacts, 22 March 2017

'UK Legal Opinion is Clear: UK Can Choose to Stay' InFacts, 04 December 2018

'If PM breaks Law, ECJ can halt Brexit' InFacts, 04 October 2019

'The German Constituiotnal Court's Weiss Judgment is a Failure of German Constitutionalism' ELIAMEP Policy Brief, No. 116, May 2020

'Germany's Failing Court' Verfassungsblog, 18 May 2020

An interview on climate change and planning law with Lexis Nexis is here.

His interview on the requirement for a new referendum on Brexit with Debating Europe, is here

His radio interview with LBC radio on the requirement for a second EU referendum is available here.

The BBC's discussion of his argument on a second refrendum is here.

His Lexis Nexis Interview on the proposed changes to EU electoral law (taken no 06 January 2016) is here.

You can follow him on twitter at @PEleftheriadis. His personal website is




Displaying 1 - 91 of 91. Sorted by year, then title.
Filter by
  • P Eleftheriadis, A Union of Peoples: Europe as a Community of Principle (Oxford University Press 2020)
    Many political and legal philosophers compare the EU to a federal union and believe its basic laws should be subject to the standards of constitutional law, and thus find it lacking or incomplete. This book proposes a rival theory: that the substance of EU law is not constitutional, but international, and provides a close examination of the treaties and the precedents of the European courts to explore this concept further. Just like international law, EU law applies primarily to the relations between member states, who have democratically chosen to adapt their constitutional arrangements in order to share legislative and executive powers with their partners. The legal architecture of the European Union is thus best understood under a theory of dualism and not pluralism. According to this 'internationalist' view, EU law is part of the law of nations and its distinction from domestic law is a matter of substance, not form. This arrangement is supported by a cosmopolitan theory of international justice, which we may call progressive internationalism. The EU is a union of democratic peoples, freely organizing their interdependence on the basis of principles of equality and reciprocity. Its central principles are not the principles of a constitution, but cosmopolitan principles of accountability, liberty, and fairness.
    ISBN: 9780198854173
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'Corrective Justice Among States' (2020) 2 Ius Cogens 7
    DOI: 10.1007/s42439-019-00013-x
    The debate concerning solidarity and justice among states has missed the key contribution made to international affairs by corrective justice. Unlike distributive justice, which applies within states, corrective justice applies among states and in particular to cooperative arrangements creating interdependence among them. Corrective justice does not require fairness in outcomes, but only fairness in the risks and opportunities undertaken by the parties to any cooperative agreement. Corrective justice requires redress in cases of loss caused by unfairness. An important illustration of corrective justice at work is the Eurozone’s response to the financial crisis. The assistance offered to the states most burdened by financial turmoil can be best interpreted not as an attempt to arrive at fair shares, but as an attempt to remedy the losses unfairly caused to some states by the mistakes made by all of them, when designing the Eurozone’s architecture.
    ISBN: ISSN: 2524-3977
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'Book Review: EU Legal Acts ' (2020) Common Market Law Review [Review]
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'Cosmopolitan Legitimacy' in Jorge Fabra (ed), Jurisprudence in a Globalized World (Edward Elgar 2020)
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'The German Constitutional Court’s Weiss judgment is a Failure of German Constitutionalism' (2020) 116 ELIAMEP Policy Brief
    In this paper Prof. Pavlos Eleftheriadis offers a first reaction to the judgment of the German Federal Constitutional Court in Weiss regarding the ECB’s bond buying programme. He argues that the judgment is an unprecedented revolt against the law of the European Union. • The judgment of the German Federal Constitutional Court in Weiss is an unprecedented revolt against the shared law of the European Monetary Union • The Court has departed from its prior case law and especially the well-established precedents in Lisbon (2009) and Honeywell (2010) which explained how a democratic constitution is open to European integration • The Court’s arguments seem to ignore the clear constitutional obligation created by Article 23 of the German Basic Law to comply with EU law in all cases, except when there are very serious constitutional reasons not to do so. • The Court promotes an unusual theory of the ‘constitutional identity’ of Germany as a matter of the continuing ‘popular sovereignty’ of the German people, which according to the Court can only be expressed through the present Bundestag and – it appears – cannot be delegated, shared or exercised in common with other nations. • The Court’s statist theories, which have no imitators in other European courts, place it now well outside the European mainstream. • The Court’s doctrines create a potential constitutional crisis in Germany, since they antagonise the clear democratic choice of the German people to remain a member of the Eurozone, on the basis of novel doctrines about identity, democracy and popular sovereignty
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'Solidarity in the Eurozone' (2019) Bank of Greece Working Papers Series
    Proposals for Eurozone reform aim to complete its institutional architecture by securing stability without creating moral hazard. Such policy arguments inevitably rely, however, on implicit assumptions about justice, or on what is owed to whom. A common assumption is that member states are solely responsible for what happens to them. This paper, written from the point of view of public law and legal theory, asks if this assumption is correct. The relevant idea is often considered to be that of solidarity. Yet, solidarity is a puzzling concept. Although it is mentioned in the EU treaties, it does not appear to create any clear duties of mutual assistance. Many prominent legal theorists argue that solidarity will only become relevant in the future, when new European institutions bring citizens together under a single Europe-wide political community. This paper argues, however, that these arguments are misleading. They are at least incomplete in that they miss the key role played by corrective justice. Unlike distributive justice, which applies within states but not among states, corrective justice applies to cooperative arrangements creating interdependence. Corrective justice creates a principle of redress, which requires that those who are unfairly burdened by an agreement should be compensated by those who caused the unfairness. Any state that was unfairly burdened by the Eurozone’s flawed architecture, may thus have a claim of redress for the losses it incurred as a result of the unfairness. It follows that the programmes of financial assistance were not merely actions of self-preservation or prudence by the Eurozone. They were also manifestations of an existing European principle of solidarity based on corrective justice
    ISBN: ISSN 1109-6691
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'Two Doctrines of the Unwritten Constitution' (2017) 13 European Constitutional Law Review 525
    Abstract -The Gina Miller judgment of the United Kingdom Supreme Court will be famous for its protection of the rule of law against an overreaching executive. But it should also be remembered for affirming the systematic nature of the British unwritten constitution. The Supreme Court rejected the older theory of the constitution, on which some of the government’s submissions relied, according to which the British constitution is based on the political fact of parliamentary sovereignty (or an equivalent ‘rule of recognition’) and is for that reason different from that of all other states. This was the view outlined by A. V. Dicey and endorsed by the British legal community for almost a century. The Supreme Court majority (and it is possible that the minority does too) relies on a different theory of the constitution, widely described as the ‘common law’ theory, which is a better fit with constitutional history. For the majority, the UK’s constitution is higher law made by the conscious decisions of a legislature like all other law. Joining the EU was a constitutional change brought about by parliament. For this reason withdrawal from the EU and its precise terms must also be decided by an act parliament. The Supreme Court considers the unwritten constitution to be a system of principles of the rule of law, whose origins lie not in a fact of sovereignty (or in the identity of the underlying ‘political community’) but in the legal transformation of the United Kingdom three centuries ago by way of the Bill of Rights 1688, the Act of Union 1707 and other constitutional statutes that created the higher law of the constitution.
    ISBN: 1744-5515
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'Constitutional Illegitimacy over Brexit' (2017) 88 Political Quarterly 183
    Members and supporters of the British government say that the only constitutionally legitimate course of action over Brexit after the referendum is to press ahead with withdrawal from the European Union, even if that would entail the complete severance of all ties (which we normally call ‘hard Brexit’). A more sophisticated view of the constitution, however, shows that these more or less populist arguments are false. As the Supreme Court confirmed in the recent Gina Miller judgment, the constitution did not change with the June referendum. Parliament is still supreme and determines both ordinary legislation and constitutional change. In fact, if one examines closely the claim that the referendum entails hard Brexit, it becomes obvious that this claim is false as well. The referendum opened the door for one among four different possibilities. Which Brexit option—if any—the United Kingdom should take is a matter for Parliament now to decide, following the normal processes of democratic deliberation and representation.
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'The Coming Constitutional Instability ' [2017] Public Law 347
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'The Systematic Constitution' (2017) United Kingdom Constitutional Law Blog
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'Power and Principle in Constitutional Law' (2016) 45 Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy
    DOI: 10.5553/NJLP/.000052
    The whole of law, public and private, assumes a particular ordering of social life which presupposes the distinction between higher and ordinary law, in that it subjects all of official action of law-making, administration and adjudication, to a general framework of institutions at the service of equal rights. These self-embracing constitutional institutions create the conditions for political legitimacy. The constitution does not seek to create a morally perfect society. Constitutional law aims to construct legitimate institutions under which we could live side by side in spite of our disagreements and in spite of our mutual suspicion. Constitutional law is therefore invested with a very distinct moral purpose: the construction of an effective and legitimate scheme of social co-operation that enables us to live side by side as free and equal. Power alone cannot achieve this task. In this sense, just like moral reasoning, legal reasoning needs no foundations. It is continuous with practical reason. The constitution is a practical judgment, defended and justified like all others.
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'How Brexit Will Fail' (2016) Oxford Business Law Blog
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'International Institutions and Legitimacy' (2016) 2016 EUI Working Papers Claudio Corradetti and Giovanni Sartor (eds.), Global Constitutionalism Without Global Democracy (?), EUI Working Papers 21/2016, p. 79-93
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'The Institutions, 2nd ed. ' in David Vaughan and Aidan Robertson (eds), The Law of the European Union (Oxford University Press 2016)
    ISBN: 978-1-90-450111-4
  • P Eleftheriadis, ''High Speed Constitutional Reconstruction'' (2014) Solicitors Journal [Case Note]
    The HS2 ruling will restart debates about the fundamental principles of public law. The hierarchy between deeper constitutional principles and ordinary laws is now part of the constitution.
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'Democracy in the Eurozone' in WG Ringe & P Huber (ed), Legal Challenges Arising out of the Global Financial Crisis: Bail-outs, the Euro, and Regulation (Hart Publishing 2014)
    In December 2012 Four Presidents of the European Union (of the European Council, the Commission, the Central Bank and the Eurogroup) issued a paper outlining steps for a ‘genuine monetary union’ promising among others better democratic accountability for its institutions. This essay asks if an entity like the European Union - and the Eurozone within it - can indeed become democratic. I distinguish between two approaches to democracy, first as collective self-government or, second, as set of egalitarian institutions. The essay argues that the German Federal Constitutional Court supports the first theory and for that reason is very cautious of the idea of bringing democracy to the European Union. The collective view believes that without a single people, there cannot be self-government. The second theory accepts the primacy of domestic democracy but allows, by contrast, for international institutions of democratic accountability that support domestic democracy. I offer some arguments for this view and conclude that the four Presidents are not mistaken in endorsing the ambition of democratic accountability for the Eurozone. The European Union is a union of peoples. A union of this kind can become more democratic without seeking to become a democracy.
    ISBN: 9781849464390
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'The Content of European Citizenship' (2014) 15 German Law Journal 777
    Many European Union law scholars, commentators and politicians consider the creation of European citizenship by the Treaty of Maastricht an important landmark in the process towards “ever closer union.” By marking a special relationship with the Union itself, citizenship epitomizes the growing maturity of the Union as a political community and not merely an economic project of a single market. Citizenship introduces the first elements of a political, social, and emotional bond between the peoples of Europe and their new Union. Nonetheless, the content of European citizenship remains a puzzle. The rights it grants are very different to those promised by states. When looked at in detail, it fails to match many of the most central elements of citizenship.
    ISBN: ISSN: 2071-8322
  • P Eleftheriadis, Democratic Accountability for a Monetary Union, paper presented at London: UCL European Institute
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'Hart on Sovereignty' in Andrea Dolcetti, Luís Duarte d’Almeida and James Edwards (eds), Reading HLA Hart's 'The Concept of Law' (Hart Publishing 2013)
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'Austin and the Electors' in Michael Freeman & Patricia Mindus (ed), The Legacy of John Austin's Jurisprudence (Springer 2012)
  • Julie Dickson and P Eleftheriadis, 'Introduction: The Puzzles of European Union Law' in Julie Dickson & Pavlos Eleftheriadis (ed), Philosophical Foundations of European Union Law (Oxford University Press 2012)
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'The Euro and the German Courts' (2012) 128 Law Quarterly Review 216
    This note discusses the judgment of the German Constitutional Court of 9 September 2011, according to which the Euro Bailout agreements of 2010-2011 may be unconstitutional, if they encroach on the 'Budgetary Sovereignty' of the German People.
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'The Structure of European Union Law' in Thomas Streinz (ed), The EU and National Constitutional Law (Boorberg 2012)
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'A Right to Health Care' (2012) 40 Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 268
    ISBN: 1073-1105
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'Citizenship and Obligation' in Julie Dickson and Pavlos Eleftheriadis (eds), Philosophical Foundations of European Union Law (Oxford University Press 2012)
    ISBN: 978-0-19-958877-0
  • P Eleftheriadis, Kalypso Nicolaidis and J. H. H. Weiler, 'Foreword: the changing landscape of European constitutionalism' (2011) 9 International Journal of Constitutional Law 673
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'Planning Agreements as Public Contracts Under the EU Procurement Rules' (2011) 20 Public Procurement Law Review 43
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'The Institutions' in David Vaughan QC and Aidan Robertson QC (eds), The Law of the European Union (Oxford University Press 2011)
    ISBN: 978-1-90-450111-4
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'The Moral Distinctiveness of the European Union' (2011) 9 International Journal of Constitutional Law 695
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'Art and Moral Dilemmas' in Johannes Odenthal and Elina Kountouri (eds), Kalliopi Lemos: A Sculptural Trilogy About Europe’s Fragile Borders (Göttingen: Steidl 2010)
    In the last three years the artist Kalliopi Lemos has constructed three large sculptures consisting mainly of boats used by illegal immigrants to cross from Turkey into Greece. These boats were discarded on the island of Chios, where Lemos discovered them. She exhibited these three sculptures in public settings in Athens, Istanbul and Berlin, with the respective titles: Crossing, Round Voyage and Crossroads. What is the meaning of this work? In this essay (which will form part of a forthcoming book on this trilogy, alongside essays by Arthur Danto and Thomas Pogge) Pavlos Eleftheriadis argues that art does not seek to resolve moral dilemmas, such as the dilemma posed by the competing claims of justice made by the illegal immigrants and the neediest of our own society. The power of art is in reminding us (in a way that does not deploy philosophical arguments but is equally or more persuasive) of the profound importance of our moral responsibility towards everyone.
    ISBN: 978-3-86930-052-8
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'Human Rights for Liberals' (2010) 3 Global Justice: Theory, Practice, Rhetoric 42
    James Griffin’s rich and elegant study, On Human Rights (Oxford, 2008), is a superbly accomplished book. Its range is impressive. It offers a discussion of the general status of values, a general theory of rights, concrete accounts of the right to welfare, the right to privacy, the right to life, the link with democracy and the idea of group rights, among other things. At every stage we are treated to a clear, rigorous and elegant discussion full of broad learning and penetrating judgment, which readers of Griffin’s earlier books have perhaps learned to expect. Yet, the view of human rights that Griffin defends is strangely narrow and unfamiliar in that it is not connected to any political or legal framework.
    ISBN: ISSN: 1835-6842
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'Introduction: On Reading Law as a Moral Idea' (2010) 1 Jurisprudence
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'On Rights and Responsibilities' [2010] Public Law 31
    The UK Government’s Green Paper Rights and Responsibilities: Developing our Constitutional Framework, outlines a new proposal for a British Bill of Rights and Responsibilities, which may replace the Human Rights Act as the main constitutional statement of human rights in the United Kingdom. The Green Paper does not address squarely the role that rights play in protecting liberty. It does not deal with the modern literature on justice, liberty and democracy. The failures are surprising, given the significance of what is being proposed. The experience of modern constitutional law teaches us that we need strong and independent judges and clear public laws, if rights are to be effective. The Green Paper fails to do justice to this long tradition. By making our rights conditional on someone’s (and mainly the government’s) view of our own virtue, the government’s proposal, at least as it stands today, threatens to undermine some of the most central safeguards of liberty.
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'Pluralism and Integrity' (2010) Ratio Juris 365
    One of the theoretical developments associated with the law of the European Union has been the flourishing of legal and constitutional theories that extol the virtues of pluralism. Pluralism in constitutional theory is offered in particular as a novel argument for the denial of unity within a framework of constitutional government. This essay argues that pluralism fails to respect the value of integrity. It also shows that at least one pluralist theory seeks to overcome the incoherence of pluralism by implicitly endorsing monism. The coherence of European legal reasoning will be best preserved, if we consider that both the national legal order and the international (or European) such order endorse a sophisticated view of their own limits.
    ISBN: 0952-1917
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'The Law of Laws' (2010) 1 Transnational Legal Theory 597
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'Law and Sovereignty' (2010) 29 Law and Philosophy 535
    How is it possible that the idea of sovereignty still features in law and legal philosophy? Sovereignty is normally taken to refer to absolute power. Yet modern law assumes that power is exercised by officials constrained by legal rules and the rule of law. This essay argues that a closer look at sovereignty and law shows that the first impression is correct: law and sovereignty are mutually exclusive. Philosophically speaking, sovereignty is and has always been incompatible with the rule of law and with constitutional law itself. Sovereignty and constitutional government are mutually exclusive.
    ISBN: 0167-5249
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'The Universality of Rights' (2009) Indian Journal of Constitutional Law
    This essay argues that the universality claim is a claim concerning two different domains: first, the domain of the political and, second, the domain of foreign policy. The domain of the political gives us a theory of political rights as we find them in Rawls' Political Liberalism. The domain of foreign policy gives us a theory of human rights as we find them in Rawls' Law of Peoples. Both are distinct from a third domain, that of the moral relations of persons, where rights also are seen to have a bearing. We have therefore political rights, human rights, and moral rights. Only the first two enjoy universality. The distinction between the moral, the political and the international domains is crucial to the success of the claim to universality.
  • P Eleftheriadis, Legal Rights (Oxford University Press 2008)
    ISBN: 978-0-19-954528-5
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'The Standing of States in the European Union' in Nicholas Tsagourias (ed), Transnational Constitutionalism: International and European Perspectives (Cambridge University Press 2007)
    ISBN: 978-0-521-87204-1
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'After Aarhus' (2006) European Advocate 10
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'The Rule of Law in Modern Greece' in Kevin Featherstone (ed), Politics and Policy in Greece: The Challenge of Modernisation (Routledge, London 2006)
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'Constitutional Reform and the Rule of Law in Greece' (2005) 28 West European Politics 317
    A critical analysis of the last ten years of constitutional developments in Greece
    ISBN: 0140-2382
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'Constitution or Treaty?' (2004) The Federal Trust Online Paper 12/04 1
    A discussion of the Draft EU Constitution
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'Cosmopolitan Law' (2003) 9(2) European Law Journal 241
    DOI: 10.1111/1468-0386.00177
    ISBN: 1468-0386
  • P Eleftheriadis and Nicos Alivizatos, 'The Greek Constitutional Amendment of 2001' (2002) 7 South European Society and Poiltics 63
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'Book Review: Governing With Judges by Alec Stone Sweet' (2001) 72 Political Quarterly 402 [Review]
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'Book Review: Social Rights Under the Constitution, by C. Fabre' (2001) 72 Political Quarterly 133 [Review]
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'The European Constitution and Cosmopolitan Ideals' (2001) 7 The Columbia Journal of European Law 21
    ISBN: 1076-6715
  • P Eleftheriadis, Constitutionalism and Political Values: The Normative Presuppositions of Constitutional Law [In Greek] (Sakkoulas, Athens 1999)
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'The Future of Environmental Rights in the European Union ' in Philip Alston (ed), The European Union and Human Rights (Oxford University Press 1999)
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'Begging the Constitutional Question' (1998) 36 Journal of Common Market Studies 255
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'Political Romanticism in Modern Greece' (1998) 17 Journal of Modern Greek Studies 41
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'The Direct Effect of Community Law' (1997) 16 Yearbook of European Law 205
    ‘The Direct Effect of Community Law: Conceptual Issues’ 16 Yearbook of European Law (1996) 205-221.
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'Aspects of European Constitutionalism' (1996) 21 European Law Review 32
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'The Analysis of Property Rights' (1996) Oxford Journal of Legal Studies
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'Unfreedom in a Laissez Faire State' (1994) 80 Archiv für Rechts- und Sozialphilosophie 168
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'Freedom as a Fact ' (1993) 56 Modern Law Review 897

Research programmes

Research Interests

https://www.pavloseleftheriadis.comConstitutional Law, Human Rights, Environmental Law, Planning Law, European Union Law, Philosophy of Law 

Options taught

Jurisprudence, Constitutional Principles of the EU

Blog posts by Pavlos Eleftheriadis

05 May 2017

2016-2017 Oxford Business Law Blog Round-Up: Most Read Opinion Pieces

By John Armour, Faculty of Law | Horst Eidenmüller, St Hugh's College | Pavlos Eleftheriadis, Mansfield College | Luca Enriques, Faculty of Law | Ariel Ezrachi, Pembroke College | Cheng Lim | Bruno Meyerhof Salama | Calum Sargeant | TJ Saw | Maurice Stucke, Institute of European and Comparative Law

Oxford Business Law Blog
28 Mar 2017

UK’s obligations won’t go to zero if we quit with no deal

By Pavlos Eleftheriadis, Mansfield College

Research Collection: BREXIT
28 Mar 2017

Right to remain may already be guaranteed

By Pavlos Eleftheriadis, Mansfield College

Research Collection: BREXIT
23 Mar 2017

EU financial claims against the UK are enforceable

By Pavlos Eleftheriadis, Mansfield College

Research Collection: BREXIT
15 Feb 2017

How to Make a Transitional Brexit Arrangement

By Pavlos Eleftheriadis, Mansfield College

Oxford Business Law Blog
30 Jan 2017

How the Government lost the Article 50 case

By Pavlos Eleftheriadis, Mansfield College

Research Collection: BREXIT
30 Jan 2017

The Systematic Constitution

By Pavlos Eleftheriadis, Mansfield College

Research Collection: BREXIT
12 Jan 2017

The Illegitimacy of Brexit

By Pavlos Eleftheriadis, Mansfield College

Research Collection: BREXIT
17 Nov 2016

How Brexit will Fail

By Pavlos Eleftheriadis, Mansfield College

Research Collection: BREXIT
27 Oct 2016

How Brexit will Fail

By Pavlos Eleftheriadis, Mansfield College

Oxford Business Law Blog
25 Jul 2016

Legal Aspects of Withdrawal from the EU: A Briefing Note

By Pavlos Eleftheriadis, Mansfield College | Luca Enriques, Faculty of Law

Oxford Business Law Blog
04 Jul 2016

A New Referendum is a Constitutional Requirement

By Pavlos Eleftheriadis, Mansfield College

Oxford Business Law Blog
04 Jul 2016

A New Referendum is a Constitutional Requirement

By Pavlos Eleftheriadis, Mansfield College

Research Collection: BREXIT
06 Jun 2016

The UK and the Eurozone

By Pavlos Eleftheriadis, Mansfield College

Oxford Business Law Blog
06 Jun 2016

The UK and the Eurozone

By Pavlos Eleftheriadis, Mansfield College

Research Collection: BREXIT

Research projects