Movatterモバイル変換

Leonid Pitamic was convinced that law could not be understood and explored by a single method aiming at a pure object of enquiry. He argued that it was necessary to employ other methods besides the normative one (especially the sociological and axiological methods), which, however, should not be confounded. Methodological syncretism can be avoided by clearly distinguishing between different aspects of law and by allowing the methods to support each other. By following this guideline, and by arguing according to a (...) clear method, we can also open up a space for dialogue and for the juxtaposition of contrasting points of view. (shrink)

Direct download(2 more)   Export citation   Bookmark   2 citations  

Direct download   Export citation   Bookmark  

No categories

Direct download(2 more)   Export citation   Bookmark  

Law is a system of legal rules and legal principles. The distinction between them is a relative one. Always such definite major and minor premises are to be formed that the case can be subsumed under the rule and a conclusion, which includes the decision, can be drawn. This applies to legal principles that are operationalised by legal rules as well as to statutory forms of legal rules, which are often open as to their meaning and/or contain definitions that comprise (...) elements of principles. The basic characteristic of legal principles is that they are value measures directing the definition of legal rules as to their contents, the understanding of the rules, and the manner of their application. Legal principles aim at a goal, have weight, and define the scope of the meaning within which the legal rules move. The operationalisation of legal principles is the _ratio decidendi_ that the court has to achieve in order to be able to decide in a concrete case. Legal principles live through the rules that are the reasons for the decision in a concrete case. New cases can be solved by a new operationalisation of legal principles or by analogous application of precedents if the new cases, in their essential elements, correspond to cases that have already been decided. (shrink)

Direct download(2 more)   Export citation   Bookmark  

No categories

Export citation   Bookmark  

Direct download(2 more)   Export citation   Bookmark  

Direct download(2 more)   Export citation   Bookmark  

Direct download(2 more)   Export citation   Bookmark  

The basic question is whether and in what sense it is possible to speak about gaps in the law. If we disagree with Kelsen's thesis that the nature of gaps in the law is that of an ideological formula, then we have to define them legally and to find the criteria regarding how they can be filled. It is also important that incompletenesses as regards contents - Hart treats them as "open texture" - are organic parts of laws. The Slovene (...) Courts Act is in accord with this thesis and for that very reason provides - the provision was written by the author of this paper - that "the judge has to decide in such a way as if he had in front of him an indefinite number of equal cases". (shrink)

No categories

Direct download(2 more)   Export citation   Bookmark