This category needs an editor. We encourage you to help if you are qualified.
Volunteer, or read more about what this involves.
Related categories

67 found
Order:
1 — 50 / 67
  1. The Argument of Rightness as an Element of the Discretionary Power of the Administrative Judge.Bartosz Wojciechowski & Marek Zirk-Sadowski - 2020 - International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue Internationale de Sémiotique Juridique 33 (1):215-229.
    The article concerns the situation of the judicial application of the law where the entity applying the law refers in a decision-making process to moral principles. The decision should be based on the directives of interpretation, which indicate the need for such a determination of the meaning of the applicable norms so that it remains in harmony with commonly accepted moral rules of the society. The equity has one more purpose; namely, it allows for the process of decision-making—and not just (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  2. Judicial Greatness and the Duties of a Judge.Omri Ben-Zvi - 2016 - Law and Philosophy 35 (6):615-654.
    This paper addresses the phenomenon of judicial greatness by developing a general concept of greatness and applying it to law. Under the view offered in the paper, greatness is connected to theoretical or methodological diversification. When applied to adjudication, this means that great judges are revered because they successfully make a prima facie case for their novel adjudicative methods. This is not a judicial duty but rather a voluntary project. However, once a judge succeeds in making such a prima facie (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  3. Reasons of Law: Dworkin on the Legal Decision.Anthony R. Reeves - 2016 - Jurisprudence 7 (2):210-230.
    Ronald Dworkin once identified the basic question of jurisprudence as: ‘What, in general, is a good reason for a decision by a court of law?’ I argue that, over the course of his career, Dworkin gave an essentially sound answer to this question. In fact, he gave a correct answer to a broader question: ‘What is a good reason for a legal decision, generally?’ For judges, officials of executive and administrative agencies, lawyers, non-governmental organizations, and ordinary subjects acting in the (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  4. Constitutional Avoidance in Social Rights Adjudication.Farrah Ahmed & Tarunabh Khaitan - 2015 - Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 35 (3):607-625.
    In Judging Social Rights, Jeff King makes a powerful case for a limited, incrementalist, judicial approach to social rights adjudication. We argue that while King’s prescriptions are justified, he is too cautious about the applicability of his incrementalist prescriptions to legal systems that suffer systemic administrative inefficiencies. Using the Indian experience as a case study, we show that such caution is misplaced, and that at least one of King’s incrementalist strategies, constitutional avoidance, has particular salience for such jurisdictions.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  5. A Republican Theory of Adjudication.Frank Lovett - 2015 - Res Publica 21 (1):1-18.
    In recent years there has been a revival of interest in civic republicanism. In light of this revival, it is interesting to consider what sort of theory of legal or judicial adjudication such a doctrine—centered on the value of promoting freedom from domination—would recommend. After discussing the importance of such a theory and clarifying its relationship to broader questions of institutional design, it is argued that theories of adjudication should be assessed according to three criteria: first, their contribution to the (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  6. Feminizing Human Rights Adjudication: Feminist Method and the Proportionality Principle. [REVIEW]Harriet Samuels - 2013 - Feminist Legal Studies 21 (1):39-60.
    Proportionality is one of the most important adjudicatory tools, in human rights decision-making, primarily employed to balance rights and interests. Despite this there is very little feminist analysis of its use by the courts. This article discusses the doctrine of proportionality and considers its amenability to feminist legal methods. It relies on theories of deliberative democracy to argue that the proportionality test can be applied in a manner that facilitates a more “interactive universalism”, allows for greater participation in decision-making and (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  7. 'Too Young to Sell Me Sex!?' Mens Rea, Mistake of Fact, Reckless Exploitation, and the Underage Sex Worker.Lucinda Vandervort - 2012 - Criminal Law Quarterly 58 (3/4):355-378.
    In 1987, apprehension that “unreasonable mistakes of fact” might negative mens rea in sexual assault cases led the Canadian Parliament to enact “reasonable steps” requirements for mistakes of fact with respect to the age of complainants. The role and operation of the “reasonable steps” provisions in ss. 150.1(4) and (5) and, to a lesser extent, s. 273.2 of the Criminal Code, must be reassessed. Mistakes of fact are now largely addressed at common law by jurisprudence that has re-invigorated judicial awareness (...)
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  8. Limits of Legality: The Ethics of Lawless Judging.Jeffrey Brand-Ballard (ed.) - 2010 - Oxford University Press.
    Introduction -- Practical reasons and judicial use of force -- Deviating from legal standards -- The legal duties of judges -- The normative classification of legal results -- Reasons to deviate -- Adherence rules -- Obeying adherence rules -- The judicial oath -- Legal duty and political obligation -- Systemic effects -- Agent-relative principles -- Optimal adherence rules -- Guidance rules -- Treating like cases alike -- Implementation -- Theoretical implications -- Conclusion.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  9. Larry Alexander and Emily Sherwin, Demystifying Legal Reasoning Reviewed By.Jacob M. Held - 2010 - Philosophy in Review 30 (2):74-76.
  10. Conflictos Entre Derechos Constitucionales y Maneras de Resolverlos.José Juan Moreso - 2010 - Arbor 186 (745):821-832.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  11. Demystifying Legal Reasoning.Larry Alexander & Emily Sherwin (eds.) - 2008 - Cambridge University Press.
    Demystifying Legal Reasoning defends the proposition that there are no special forms of reasoning peculiar to law. Legal decision makers engage in the same modes of reasoning that all actors use in deciding what to do: open-ended moral reasoning, empirical reasoning, and deduction from authoritative rules. This book addresses common law reasoning when prior judicial decisions determine the law, and interpretation of texts. In both areas, the popular view that legal decision makers practise special forms of reasoning is false.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  12. Adjudication and the Law.Timothy Endicott - 2007 - Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 27 (2):311-326.
    It can be compatible with justice and the rule of law for a court to impose new legal liabilities retrospectively on a defendant. But judges do not need to distinguish between imposing a new liability, and giving effect to a liability that the defendant had at the time of the events in dispute. The distinction is to be drawn by asking which of the court's reasons for decision the institutions of the legal system had already committed the courts to act (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  13. Guidance and Constraint: The Action-Guiding Capacity of Neil MacCormick’s Theory of Legal Reasoning. [REVIEW]Torben Spaak - 2007 - Law and Philosophy 26 (4):343-376.
    Offers analysis of MacCormick's positivistic account of legal reasoning, partially in response to Dworkin's claim that positivism is inadequate as a theory of law because it cannot account for the nature of legal reasoning. Having analyzed MacCormick's theory and having applied it to some cases, we are now ready to evaluate it. My conclusion is that inmany cases MacCormick's theory can indeed give the judge the kind of concrete guidance he needs when with a hard case. The reason why MacCormick's (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  14. Justice in Robes.Ronald Dworkin (ed.) - 2006 - Belknap Press.
    In the course of that critical study he discusses the work of many of the most influential lawyers and philosophers of the era, including Isaiah Berlin, Richard ...
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   48 citations  
  15. Should Like Cases Be Treated Alike?Andrei Marmor - 2005 - Legal Theory 11 (1):27-38.
  16. A Synthetic Approach to Legal Adjudication.Samuel C. Rickless - 2005 - San Diego Law Review 42:519-532.
    When faced with a dispute concerning how a given legal provision (whether constitutional or statutory) applies to a particular set of facts, how should a judge proceed? It is commonplace to say that, in the first instance, she should look to the meanings of the words that constitute the provision itself. If she is lucky, then the relevant meanings are clear; and if the facts are not in dispute, then the resolution is obvious. Unfortunately.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  17. Prescriptive Legal Positivism: Law, Rights and Democracy.Tom Campbell (ed.) - 2004 - Cavendish Publishing.
    Tom Campbell is well known for his distinctive contributions to legal and political philosophy over three decades. In emphasising the moral and political importance of taking a positivist approach to law and rights, he has challenged current academic orthodoxies and made a powerful case for regaining and retaining democratic control over the content and development of human rights. This collection of his essays reaches back to his pioneering work on socialist rights in the 1980s and forward from his seminal book, (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  18. Judicial Hegemony: Dworkin's.Brian Donohue - 2002 - Ratio Juris 15 (3):267-282.
  19. 'International Meaning': Comity in Fundamental Rights Adjudication.Timothy A. O. Endicott - 2002 - International Journal of Refugee Studies 13:280-292.
    In fundamental rights adjudication, should judges defer to the judgment of other decision makers? How can they defer, without betraying the respect that judges ought to accord those rights? How can they refuse to defer, without betraying the respect that judges ought to accord to other decision makers? I argue that only principles of comity justify deference, and their reach is limited. Comity never forbids the judges to take and to act upon a different view of fundamental rights from that (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  20. The Morality of Precedent in Law.Raphael A. Akanmidu - 2001 - Ratio Juris 14 (2):244-251.
  21. Practical Rules: When We Need Them and When We Don’T.Alan H. Goldman (ed.) - 2001 - Cambridge University Press.
    Rules proliferate; some are kept with a bureaucratic stringency bordering on the absurd, while others are manipulated and ignored in ways that injure our sense of justice. Under what conditions should we make exceptions to rules, and when should they be followed despite particular circumstances? The two dominant models in the literature on rules are the particularist account and that which sees the application of rules as normative. Taking a position that falls between these two extremes, Alan Goldman provides a (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  22. Judicial Can’T.Scott J. Shapiro - 2001 - Noûs 35 (s1):530 - 557.
  23. Ethics for Adversaries: The Morality of Roles in Public and Professional Life.Arthur Isak Applbaum - 1999 - Princeton University Press.
    The adversary professions--law, business, and government, among others--typically claim a moral permission to violate persons in ways that, if not for the professional role, would be morally wrong. Lawyers advance bad ends and deceive, business managers exploit and despoil, public officials enforce unjust laws, and doctors keep confidences that, if disclosed, would prevent harm. Ethics for Adversaries is a philosophical inquiry into arguments that are offered to defend seemingly wrongful actions performed by those who occupy what Montaigne called "necessary offices."Applbaum (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   38 citations  
  24. Modest Judicial Restraint.Theodore M. Benditt - 1999 - Law and Philosophy 18 (3):243 - 270.
    The main argument of this paper is that there are reasons for judges not only to evaluate the substantive merit of legislation, but to advert to the fact that the place of elected legislatures in our scheme of government gives legislation a standing, an entitlement to consideration, that may go beyond judicial estimates of its intrinsic merit.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  25. Modest Judicial Restraint.Theodore M. Benditt - 1999 - Law and Philosophy 18 (3):243-270.
    "The main argument of this paper is that there are reasons for judges not only to evaluate the substantive merit of legislation, but to advert to the fact that the place of elected legislatures in our scheme of government gives legislation a standing, an entitlement to consideration, that may go beyond judicial estimates of its intrinsic merit." [Is this just a statement of procedural legitimacy?] "To answer the question [of who assigns rights], courts must take a view as to the (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  26. The Impossibility of the Rule of Law.Timothy A. O. Endicott - 1999 - Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 19 (1):1-18.
    No community fully achieves the ideal of the rule of law. Puzzles about the content of the ideal seem to make it necessarily unattainable (and, therefore, an incoherent ideal). Legal systems necessarily contain vague laws. They typically allow for change in the law, they typically provide for unreviewable official decisions, and they never regulate every aspect of the life of a community. It may seem that the ideal can never be achieved because of these features of legal practice. But I (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  27. Moral Theory and Legal Reasoning.Scott Brewer (ed.) - 1998 - Garland.
    The articles in this volume consider at what stage of legal reasoning should a judge or lawyer make specifically moral judgments.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  28. Natural Law and Legal Reasoning.Ronald Dworkin - 1998 - In Scott Brewer (ed.), Moral Theory and Legal Reasoning. Garland.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  29. Affirmative Duties and the Limits of Self-Sacrifice.Larry Alexander - 1996 - Law and Philosophy 15 (1):65 - 74.
    American criminal law reflects the absence of any general duty of Good Samaritanism. Nonetheless, there are some circumstances in which it imposes affirmative duties to aid others. In those circumstances, however, the duty to aid is canceled whenever aiding subjects the actor to a certain level of risk or sacrifice, a level that can be less than the risk or sacrifice faced by the beneficiary if not aided. In this article, I demonstrate that this approach to limiting affirmative duties to (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  30. Legal Reasoning and Political Conflict.Cass R. Sunstein - 1996 - Oxford University Press USA.
    The most glamorous and even glorious moments in a legal system come when a high court recognizes an abstract principle involving, for example, human liberty or equality. Indeed, Americans, and not a few non-Americans, have been greatly stirred--and divided--by the opinions of the Supreme Court, especially in the area of race relations, where the Court has tried to revolutionize American society. But these stirring decisions are aberrations, says Cass R. Sunstein, and perhaps thankfully so. In Legal Reasoning and Political Conflict, (...)
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  31. Legal Reasoning and Political Conflict.Cass R. Sunstein (ed.) - 1996 - Oxford University Press USA.
    The most glamorous and even glorious moments in a legal system come when a high court recognizes an abstract principle involving, for example, human liberty or equality. Indeed, Americans, and not a few non-Americans, have been greatly stirred--and divided--by the opinions of the Supreme Court, especially in the area of race relations, where the Court has tried to revolutionize American society. But these stirring decisions are aberrations, says Cass R. Sunstein, and perhaps thankfully so. In Legal Reasoning and Political Conflict, (...)
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  32. External Justifications and Institutional Roles.A. John Simmons - 1996 - Journal of Philosophy 93 (1):28-36.
    In his paper "Role Obligations," Michael Hardimon defends an account of the nature and justification of institutional obligations that he takes to be clearly superior to the "standard" voluntarist view. Hardimon argues that this standard view presents a "misleading and distorted" picture of role obligations (and of morality generally); and in its best form he claims this view still "leaves out" of its understanding of even contractual role obligations an "absolutely vital factor". I argue against Hardimon that a related version (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  33. Overcoming Law.Richard A. Posner (ed.) - 1995 - Harvard University Press.
    Throughout, the book is unified by Posner's distinctive stance, which is pragmatist in philosophy, economic in methodology, and liberal (in the sense of John ...
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  34. In Defense of Political Liberalism.Brian Barry - 1994 - Ratio Juris 7 (3):325-330.
  35. Role Obligations.Michael Hardimon - 1994 - Journal of Philosophy 91 (7):333-363.
    Argues that role obligations are not marginal, "that they are central to morality and should be taken seriously." "A 'role obligation' is a moral requirement, which attaches to an institutional role, whose content is fixed by the function of the role, and whose normative force flows from the role." Rejects what he calls the doctrine of perfect adequacy which holds that role obligations are both comprehensive and transparent. Although this may have been plausible at earlier times, it is clearly implausible (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   82 citations  
  36. Dyzenhaus on Positivism and Judicial Obligation.Michael Hartney - 1994 - Ratio Juris 7 (1):44-55.
  37. Legal Formalism and Instrumentalism - a Pathological Study.David Lyons - 1993 - In . Cambridge University Press.
    Compares formalism and instrumentalism and evaluates their general claims. “Part of what is meant by formalism is this: The law provides sufficient basis for deciding any case that arises. There are no “gaps” within the law, and there is but one sound legal decision for each case.” The formalist also holds that law is traceable to an authoritative source. “…sound legal decisions can be justified as the conclusions of valid deductive syllogisms. Because law is believed to be complete and univocal, (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  38. Judging in Good Faith.Steven J. Burton - 1992 - Cambridge University Press.
    This book offers an original theory of adjudication focused on the ethics of judging in courts of law, and proposes two main theses. One is the good faith thesis, which defends the possibility of lawful judicial decisions even when judges exercise discretion. The other is the permissible discretion thesis, which defends the compatibility of judicial discretion and legal indeterminacy with the legitimacy of adjudication in a constitutional democracy. Together these two theses oppose both conservative theories that would restrict the scope (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  39. Critical Legal Studies: A Liberal Critique.Andrew Altman (ed.) - 1990 - Princeton University Press.
    In this first book-length liberal reply to CLS, Andrew Altman systematically examines the philosophical underpinnings of the CLS movement and exposes the deficiencies in the major lines of the CLS argument against liberalism.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  40. Should Lawyers Listen to Philosophers About Legal Ethics?M. B. E. Smith - 1990 - Law and Philosophy 9 (1):67 - 93.
    In the recent spate of philosophers' writing on legal ethics, most contend that lawyers' professional role exposes them to great risk of moral wrongdoing; and some even conclude that the role's demands inevitably corrupt lawyers' characters. In assessing their arguments, I take up three questions: (1) whether philosophers' training and experience give them authority to scold lawyers; (2) whether anything substantive has emerged in the scolding that lawyers are morally bound to take to heart; and (3) whether lawyers ought to (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  41. Legal Reasoning as a Model for Moral Reasoning.Alan H. Goldman - 1989 - Law and Philosophy 8 (1):131 - 149.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  42. Lawyers and Justice: An Ethical Study.David Luban - 1988 - Princeton University Press.
    This is a book about the ethics of the legal profession proceeding from one basic premise: our nation is so dependent on its lawyers that their ethical problems transform themselves into public difficulties.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   19 citations  
  43. Legal Reasoning as a Special Case of Moral Reasoning.Aleksander Peczenik - 1988 - Ratio Juris 1 (2):123-136.
  44. Conflicts of Law and Morality.Kent Greenawalt (ed.) - 1987 - Oxford University Press.
    Powerful emotion and pursuit of self-interest have many times led people to break the law with the belief that they are doing so with sound moral reasons. This study is a comprehensive philosophical and legal analysis of the gray area in which the foundations of law and morality clash. This objective book views these oblique circumstances from two perspectives: that of the person who faces a possible conflict between the claims of morality and law and must choose whether or not (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   21 citations  
  45. Reconstructing Legal Theory.David Lyons - 1987 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 16 (4):379-393.
  46. Judicial Obligation, Precedent and the Common Law.Stephen R. Perry - 1987 - Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 7 (2):215-257.
  47. Bentham and the Common Law Tradition.Gerald J. Postema (ed.) - 1986 - Oxford University Press.
    This book offers a philosophical interpretation of the historical debate between Bentham and classical Common Law Theory, a debate that is fundamental to philosophical thought and has shaped contemporary conceptions of nature, tasks, and limits of law and adjudication. The author explores the philosophical foundations of Common Law theory, focusing particularly on the writings of Sir Mathew Hale and David Hume.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   26 citations  
  48. The Morality of Freedom.Joseph Raz - 1986 - Oxford University Press.
    Ranging over central issues of morals and politics and the nature of freedom and authority, this study examines the role of value-neutrality, rights, equality, ...
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   507 citations  
  49. MAN, LAW AND MODERN FORMS OF LIFE, Vol. 1 Law and Philosophy Library, Pp. 251-261.Eugenio Bulygin, Jean Louis Gardies & Ilkka Nilniluoto (eds.) - 1985 - D. Reidel.
    In this paper I argue that the rationality of law and legal decision making would be enhanced by a systematic attempt to recognize and respond to the implications of empirical uncertainty for policy making and decision making. Admission of uncertainty about the accuracy of facts and the validity of assumptions relied on to make inferences of fact is commonly avoided in law because it raises the spectre of paralysis of the capacity to decide issues authoritatively. The roots of this short-sighted (...)
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  50. Maintaining the Rule of Law.Peter Ingram - 1985 - Philosophical Quarterly 35 (141):359-381.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
1 — 50 / 67