Radbruch and Hart on the Grudge Informer: A Reconsideration

Ratio Juris 15 (2):186-205 (2002)
  Copy   BIBTEX


Hart's defense of the separation of law and morality is partly based on his refusal to accept Radbruch's solution of the well‐known grudge informer case, in his famous article “Statutory Injustice and Suprastatutory Law.” In this paper, I present a detailed reconstruction of the “debate” between Radbruch and Hart on this case. I reach the conclusion that Hart fails to address the issue that was Radbruch's primary concern, namely the legal position of the judiciary when dealing with criminal statutes. I suggest that Hart's separation thesis cannot be upheld in the face of this concern. In my argument, Hart's mistaken understanding of the verdict of the Oberlandesgericht Bamberg that he refers to plays a crucial role.



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,122

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Hart and Feinberg on responsibility.John Gardner - 2008 - In Matthew H. Kramer (ed.), The Legacy of H. Oxford University Press.
Hart on Legality, Justice and Morality.John Gardner - 2010 - Jurisprudence 1 (2):253-265.
H. L. A. Hart and the "open texture" of language.Brian Bix - 1991 - Law and Philosophy 10 (1):51 - 72.
Hart, legal rules and Palm tree justice.WilfridJ Waluchow - 1985 - Law and Philosophy 4 (1):41 - 70.
On Hart's ways : law as reason and as fact.John Finnis - 2007 - American Journal of Jurisprudence 52 (1):25-53.
The philosophy of law of Gustav radbruch.Anton-Hermann Chroust - 1944 - Philosophical Review 53 (1):23-45.


Added to PP

104 (#159,569)

6 months
5 (#366,001)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Thomas Mertens
Radboud University Nijmegen

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references