In Lord Sumption and the Limits of the Law, leading public law scholars reflect on the nature and limits of the judicial role and its implications for human rights protection and democracy. The starting point for this reflection is Lord Sumption's lecture, 'The Limits of the Law', which grounds a wide-ranging discussion of questions including the scope and legitimacy of judicial law-making, the interpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights, and the continuing significance and legitimacy, or otherwise, of the European Court of Human Rights. Lord Sumption ends the volume with a substantial commentary on the responses to his lecture.

1. Introduction
NW Barber, Richard Ekins and Paul Yowell
2. The Limits of Law
Lord Sumption
3. Sumption's Assumptions
Martin Loughlin
4. Living Trees or Deadwood: The Interpretive Challenge of the European Convention on Human Rights
Sandra Fredman
5. Judges, Interpretation and Self-Government
Lord Hoffmann
6. Judicial Law-Making and the 'Living' Instrumentalisation of the ECHR
John Finnis
7. The Role of Courts in the Joint Enterprise of Governing
Aileen Kavanagh
8. Three Wrong Turns in Lord Sumption's Conception of Law and Democracy
Jeff King
9. The Human Rights Act and 'Coordinate Construction': Towards a ' Parliament Square ' Axis for Human Rights?
Carol Harlow
10. Limits of Law: Reflections from Private and Public Law
Paul Craig
11. The Limits of Lord Sumption: Limited Legal Constitutionalism and the Political Form of the ECHR
Richard Bellamy
12. A Response
Lord Sumption

“...this is a stimulating and provocative book. The informed and penetrating discussion of the issues will be of great interest to lawyers generally, particularly to those concerned with public law.” –  Hon Sir Anthony Mason, Hong Kong Law Journal

“Distinguished public lawyers, mostly from Oxford, reflect on Lord Sumption's ideas. The resulting volume is a rich feast of disagreements... [The] commentary advances the human rights debate at a time when the continuation of the 1998 constitutional settlement is no longer assured.” –  Jonathan Morgan, Law Quarterly Review