A Public law journal

We welcome submissions to the Articles, Analysis and Book Review sections of the journal.

Articles will ordinarily be between 10 – 12,000 words in length (inclusive of footnotes). In its Articles section, Public Law strives to publish research-based scholarship of the highest quality, that is, scholarship which demonstrates a depth of analysis or a sufficiently new or innovative approach to the subject matter that it is likely to become a point of reference. Articles are likely to be highly developed pieces of scholarship, substantively and argumentatively sophisticated pieces of research which bring new insights to existing debates or open up fresh avenues for public law discussion.  Articles must be accompanied by an abstract of up to 300 words.

Analysis pieces will normally be up to 4,000 words in length (inclusive of footnotes). Though they may focus on a discrete development or developments – for instance, legislation, policy proposals, and/or judicial decisions – Analysis pieces will ordinarily also connect with broader themes or patterns in public law practice and/or scholarship. Although still expected to display the high academic standards seen in lengthier pieces, analysis pieces may be more exploratory in their approach or conclusions than full articles.

Articles and analysis pieces should be submitted to the General Editors, Prof Roger Masterman and Prof Aileen McHarg, at public.law@durham.ac.uk.  Potential authors are encouraged to contact the General Editors in advance of submission to check whether the subject matter is suitable for the journal or if it overlaps with anything else currently under consideration.

Articles and analysis pieces are considered on a rolling basis, and space in the journal is normally allocated on a first-come-first-served basis (but if publication is particularly time-sensitive, it would be helpful to alert the editors to this on submission).

Book reviews, or inquiries about book reviews, should be submitted to the Book Review Editor, Dr Lewis Graham at lg513@cam.ac.uk.

All contributions must contain original, unpublished work which are not being submitted for publication elsewhere.

All contributions should conform to our style guide.

Authors should provide the biographical information in the form in which they wish it to appear in Public Law.

Copyright in all pieces accepted for publication remains with the contributors, and the publishers acquire publication rights. If all or any part of an Analysis piece or Article is reproduced elsewhere, the author should acknowledge Public Law as the original place of publication.

Editorial correspondence:

• Editors:
  Roger Masterman and Aileen McHarg
  Durham Law School
  Durham University
  Palatine Centre
  Stockton Road
  Durham
  DH1 3LE
  Tel: 0191 334 2800
  Email: public.law@durham.ac.uk
  
  
• Book Review Editor:
  Lewis Graham
  Christ’s College,
  St Andrew’s Street,
  Cambridge
  CB2 3BU
  Email: lg513@cam.ac.uk  

Correspondence to the publisher:

• Nicola Thurlow, Publisher
  Thomson Reuters
  5 Canada Square
  London
  E14 5AQ
  Email: nicola.thurlow@thomsonreuters.com

The Public Law style guide can be accessed here.

Analysis pieces and articles are subject to an initial desk review by the General Editors (or, in the case of a conflict of interest, by the deputy editors or other members of the Editorial Committee).

If the editors decide to send the manuscript out for review it will normally be sent to one expert reviewer.  We follow a double-blind process: i.e., neither the identity of the author(s) nor the identity of the reviewer(s) is revealed to the other party.

We normally aim to make an initial desk review decision within two weeks of submission, and a final decision within six weeks of being sent out for review, though it may not always be possible to adhere to these timelines.

Following peer review, the following decisions may be made:

• Accept
• Accept with revisions      
• Revise and resubmit
• Reject

A revise and resubmit decision does not guarantee acceptance on completion of revisions. 

Editorial decisions are final. 

Our open access policy can be viewed here.

The Editorial Committee is committed to Public Law reflecting the diversity and range of the discipline, both as to subject matter and methodology, and welcomes contributions from authors at all stages of their careers.  We welcome submissions from both academics and public law practitioners (broadly conceived), whether based in the United Kingdom or in other jurisdictions.  We particularly welcome submissions from female authors and from other groups that are under-represented within the discipline.  We also welcome submissions dealing with non-UK jurisdictions, though we ask that such pieces address themes or issues of general interest, rather than matters of specifically local concern. 

The general editors aim to ensure that the submission and review process is as fair as possible to all authors, regardless of sex, age, race, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, pregnancy and maternity, career stage, institutional affiliation, or geographical location.  If one or both of the general editors has a conflict of interest in relation to a particular submission, they will recuse themselves from decision-making in respect of that submission, which will be handled by the deputy editors or other members of the Editorial Committee instead.

If pieces are sent out for review, we follow a double-blind process: i.e., neither the identity of the author(s) nor the identity of the reviewer(s) is revealed to the other party.

The Editorial Committee is also committed to increasing the diversity and inclusiveness of its own membership, in terms of areas of expertise, jurisdictional representation, and protected characteristics.  To that end, appointments to the Editorial Committee will normally be made following an open recruitment process.

Tables of contents from recent issues of Public Law are available so you can discover the breadth of coverage.

Download recent tables of contents

Download Meg Russell's article titled Should We Be Worried About the Decline of Parliamentary Scrutiny?

You can download a sample issue of Public Law to see for yourself the quality of coverage you will receive as a subscriber.

Download a sample issue of Public Law

Download Meg Russell's article titled Should We Be Worried About the Decline of Parliamentary Scrutiny?

The editorial board consists of leading academics and practitioners. A complete list is available.

Download details of the editorial board

Yes, a single-user ProView subscription is available at a 50% discount. This discount is only available to individuals. It must be paid for personally and applies to new subscriptions only. Contact Proviewtrial@tr.com to find out more.