Isradingas teisėjas (creative judge)

Introduction. Constructive interpretation. Principles. Interests. Policy. Conclusion. Bibliography.

All the times judges were faced with cases where there are no particulars regulating the relationship. Or there were rules they were inconsistent or its general application would be inadequate or immoral. It is of particular interest for lawyers to read such materials and argue on judgments. Whether it was moral and inconsistent with law or unjust but one where law was applied? Strong realists as O.W.Holmes are of the oppinion that law is predictible. Some ‘believe that they can discover, behind the ‘paper rules’, some ‘real rules’ descirptive of uniformities and regulatories in actual judicial behaviour […] which […] will serve a more reliable prediction-insturments.’

In my oppinion it is very intersting to have look into the realms of judges when they deal with ‘hard cases’. In this essay I will discuss jurisprudential ideas about the principles that guide and methods that are applied by judges when passing verdicts. I find no interest in discusing how ‘positivst’ judges apply logics interpreting the law. What I am concerned is how judges solve the cases when whether there is no law or existing rules must be bended to implement justice. Limits of judicial creativity will also be touched. Discussing the topic, ideas of Oxford profesor Ronald Dworkin will be analized.

  • Microsoft Word 9 KB
  • 2013 m.
  • 6 puslapiai (2056 žodžiai)
  • Universitetas
  • Andrius
  • Isradingas teisėjas (creative judge)
    10 - 2 balsai (-ų)
Isradingas teisėjas (creative judge). (2013 m. Rugpjūčio 21 d.). Peržiūrėta 2020 m. Rugpjūčio 12 d. 09:11
129 mokytojai prisijungę laukia tavo klausimo