Interpreting Precedents: A Comparative Study (Applied Legal Philosophy) [ MacCormick, D. Neil, Summers, Robert S.] on Amazon.com. FREE shipping on

an explanation of the nature of legal argumentation as manifested in the public process of litigation and adjudication upon disputed matters of law.'2 MacCormick views legal argumentation as a highly intricate process of justification, and this forms the focal point of Legal Reasoning and Legal Theory.

Care has been taken to Sir Neil MacCormick published his book Legal Reasoning and Legal Theory in 1978. final interpretation remained a possible meaning of the statutory language. At times the arguments will more easily be followed by legal theorists t MacCormick, “Statutory Interpretation in the United Kingdom”, in: Neil D. MacCormick/R. S. Summers (eds.), Interpreting Statutes, Aldershot (etc.) .1991, especially Bibliography of Professor Sir Neil MacCormick's publications.

Legal argumentation inevitably calls upon play-ers to interpret the … This chapter applies some reflections on rhetoric and argumentation in law with a view to mapping the road to a possible conciliation. Topics discussed include the arguable character of law, the rule of law, rhetorical theories, and proceduralist theories. Neil McCormick, Argumentation and Interpretation in Law, 16 Ratio Juris 16 (1993) at 25. [9] James Donato, Dworkin and Subjectivity in Legal Interpretation , 40(6) Stanford.

See also MacCormick and Weinberger (1986, 8), where it is stressed that institutionalism “includes elements of principle, of value and of consequentialist argumentation relevant to legal decision within the scope of what has to be recognised as law or legal.” 23 In fact, MacCormick and Weinberger (1986, 8) claim that their “form of legal positivism (if such it be) expands the frontiers of the legal beyond what has traditionally be dealt with by positivists.” 24 These positivist

The Magazine 1 (1). Argumentation and Interpretation in Law. Neil Maccormick - 1993 - Ratio Juris 6 (1):16-29. Reconstructing Complex Analogy Argumentation in Judicial Decisions: A Pragma-Dialectical Perspective. (v) The argument from general principles of law says that if any general principle or principles of law are applicable to the subject matter of a statutory provision, one ought to favour that interpretation of the statutory provision which is most in conformity with the general principle or principles, giving appropriate weight to the principle(s) in the light of their degree of importance both generally and in the field of law in question.

day practice of constitutional interpretation, in the courts and in general public The traditionalist argument for obeying the Constitution is that the component. Neil MacCormick, Legal Reasoning and Legal Theory 229-74 (Oxford 19

Neil MacCormick on Interpretation, Defeasibility, and the Rule of Law ∗∗ 1. Introduction - 2. Legal Reasoning and Interpretation – 2.1. The First Phase: Defending Deductivism (and Rejecting Strong Discretion) – 2.2. MacCormick vs Hart (and Dworkin) – 2.3. The Second Phase: Towards Interpretivism – 3. Law and See also MacCormick and Weinberger (1986, 8), where it is stressed that institutionalism “includes elements of principle, of value and of consequentialist argumentation relevant to legal decision within the scope of what has to be recognised as law or legal.” 23 In fact, MacCormick and Weinberger (1986, 8) claim that their “form of legal positivism (if such it be) expands the frontiers of the legal beyond what has traditionally be dealt with by positivists.” 24 These positivist [Seminar 1] MacCormick, Neil, “Argumentation and Interpretation in Law,” Ratio Juris 6 (1993) pp.

Neil maccormick argumentation and interpretation in law

Neil MacCormick & Robert. S. Summers Id. at 60. 2 MACCORMIcK & SUMMERS, supra note 1, at 172.
Agent brandon gamble

Inference from analogy, however, features in the domain of statutory law as well. As Neil MacCormick points out, “argument from analogy is by no means uncommon or unimportant in the application and interpretation of 2 Legal Reasoning and European Laws: the Perspective of Neil MacCormick-Florence, 21 May 2010 social phenomena, is argumentative.”10 MacCormick is aware that Hart’s thesis on the “open texture of law”11 requires that a complete theory of law should not ignore or neglect the theme of argumentation.12 He clearly states that “a theory of legal reasoning requires and is required by a In his theory of legal justification Neil MacCormick tries to formulate a solution for one of the central problems in modern legal theory. He explains how, in so-called hard cases in which a judge Neil Mac Cormick first put forward his thoughts on legal reasoning in a book entitled Legal Reasoning and Legal Theory (hereinafter Legal Reasoning).3 MacCormick's aim in Legal Rea soning was to explain the nature of legal argumentation as it manifests itself in court decisions.4 He focused on the legal sys Neil MacCormick authors 'Statement of Evidence by the SNP' to the Select Committee of the House of Lords on A Bill of Rights, 2 August 1977. Neil MacCormick participates in the SNP Committee on the Structure of Central Government, and drafts related SNP policy, September-October 1977.

(Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994), p. xiv.
Iec 62366 checklist

Jerzy Wroblewski and Neil MacCormick (1994), ‘On Justification and Interpretation’, ARSP-Beiheft, 53, pp. 255-68 chapter 17 | 10 pages Aleksander Peczenik (1988), ‘Authority Reasons in Legal Interpretation and Moral Reasoning’, ARSP Supplementa (III), pp. 144-52

American Legal Argumentation: The Law and Literature/Rhetoric Movement. [REVIEW] Eileen A. Scallen - 1995 - Argumentation 9 (5):705-717.