A political man in the information society: anatomy of virtual... Man in the Rays of the Universe - Philosophy, Philosophy Of Kant In Gone Baby Gone School of thought Essay, JG. He states that unlike rules, principles have the dimension of weight or importance and when two principles lead to different conclusions, the judge must take into account the relative weight of each. Lawyers and judges cannot avoid … Replying such question doesn't need to dispute too much, it offers a very simple answer: practice. It is both legislative and judicial. In Dworkin's discussion, the judge is apparently beyond the guideline of law, it appears that the judge is 'create law' by interpretation, however, his legal view is 'rules as integrity', in other words, in addition to guidelines of the law, the rules and guidelines are concealed behind the guidelines. Most of the literature assumes that interpretation of a particular document is a matter of discovering what its authors meant to say in using the words they did. Dworkin's conception of law as interpretation provides a more consistent account of (a) the process of adjudication, especially in hard cases; and (b) the internal obligations of legal practitioners, particularly judges. Critical Inquiry ©2000-2020 ITHAKA. The expository purposes are: first, to show that Dworkin's legal philosophy presents a comprehensive and unified conception of law; second, to show that Dworkin's conception is a significant and (in some respects) superior alternative to the traditional views in legal theory--natural law and legal positivism. What It Means to Interpret: A Standard Formulation and its Implicit Corollaries in Chinese Buddhism. When a statute is unclear on some point, because some crucial term is vague or because a sentence is ambiguous, lawyers say that the statute must be interpreted, and they apply what they call "techniques of statutory construction." Hart wanted to advance legal theory by providing an analysis of the distinctive structure of legal systems and a better understanding of the differences between law, morality and coercion. Free resources to assist you with your legal studies! That is consistent with what Dworkin's argues: 'No hesitation real judges decide most conditions in a significantly less methodical way. For terms and use, please refer to our Terms and Conditions so the only solution, actually accessible, can't be reached now. Dworkin says what ought to be if coercion is to be justified and what at its best actually happens in his own society, whether it be consciously or unconsciously and how judges decide or try to decide on hard cases, his defect seems to be his failure to provide a sufficient answer concerning the question on whether the duty of constructive interpretation applies irrespective of the evil of a regime of which a judge can find themselves a part of [39] . But lawyers recognize that on many issues the author had no intention either way and that on others his intention cannot be discovered. Since the will itself was valid, there was at the time no law to say the grandson could not inherit, but the court held that because of the legal principle saying that no-one should be permitted to profit from his own fraud or take advantage of his own wrong, the grandson was therefore disbarred from the inheritance. That the analysis of legal concepts is worth pursuing, distinct from sociological and historical enquiries and critical evaluation. pretation not only when lawyers interpret particular documents or stat-. All rights reserved. ), and justifies these elements by connecting them with a defensible background political morality. For Hart the ‘rule of recognition’ is a social rule and therefore established by the conduct of those who also accept the rule as a justification for disparaging those who fail to observe it [38] . The Contradictions of Conscience: Unravelling the Structure of Obligation in Equity. ‘Law as interpretation’ examines the ideas of the American jurist Ronald Dworkin, whose concept of law continues to exert considerable authority whenever contentious moral and political issues are debated. ‘Law as interpretation’ examines the ideas of the American jurist Ronald Dworkin, whose concept of law continues to exert considerable authority whenever contentious moral and political issues are debated. The court used a number of legal principles to support its decision and ‘in a society such as ours the motor manufacturer is under a special obligation in connection with the construction, promotion and sale of his vehicles’ [28] . Before we can look at the issue’s surrounding the question concerning the Hart/Dworkin debate or anything can be discussed the first thing to be addressed is who Hart was, and who Dworkin is and what the subject matter concerns. Company Registration No: 4964706. So, the law as integrity requires the judge be with a positive attitude more than a good actual result, quite simply, the judge should believe that there is an only right answer for him to seek for. Law so conceived is deeply and thoroughly political. Dworkin says the law never runs out, the answer is always there to be found and if the judge applied his mind to the matter fully a clear winner can be found [17] . Some lawyers take a more skeptical position. 7th Aug 2019 ', In case Riggs v. Palmer, it fully reflects the importance of the rule of legal integrity. Dworkin concludes that the opinion to any judge is a philosophy of regulation, even if his viewpoint was hidden and not disclosed, even if apparent inference is filled with procedures and facts. Law as Interpretation Ronald Dworkin I shall argue that legal practice is an exercise in interpretation not only when lawyers interpret particular documents or statutes but generally. Copyright © 2003 - 2020 - LawTeacher is a trading name of All Answers Ltd, a company registered in England and Wales. As legislative key points, it tells legislators that the easy exchange of justice and fairness is wrong; restricting legislators what may be appropriate to increase or change the public criteria.