LEGAL REASONABLENESS AND THE NEED FOR A LINGUISTIC APPROACH IN COMPARATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

• Authors: Sara PENNICINO

Title variants

PL

SŁUSZNOŚĆ PRAWA I POTRZEBA ANALIZY JĘZYKOZNAWCZEJ W KOMPARATYSTYCE PRAWA KONSTYTUCYJNEGO

• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

The paper focuses on the concept of reasonableness in several countries, in particular, comparing common and civil law systems. More specifically, it refers to the use of this word in the discourse of the judiciary and especially in the context of constitutional law. In the latter context reasonableness plays a crucial role in conveying values and thus construing “different” constitutionalisms; in fact it enhances the dynamics of the constitutional framework, while leaving the Constitution unaltered. Up to now, constitutional scholarship has devoted attention to the issue of reasonableness as a tool of adjudication (i.e. by including it in the wider framework of scrutiny techniques, such as strict scrutiny versus proportionality). On the contrary, the underlying hypothesis of this paper is that a solid linguistic approach will enhance the understanding of the role reasonableness plays as the quest for minima moralia in constitutional law.

PL

Artykuł skupia się na koncepcji słuszności prawa w kilkunastu krajach, ze szczególnym uwzględnieniem systemów common law i prawa cywilnego. Odnosi się do zakresu użycia terminu w dyskursie sądowym, szczególnie zaś w kontekście prawa konstytucyjnego. W dalszej treści słuszność odgrywa kluczową rolę w przekazywaniu wartości wzmacniając dynamikę ramy konstytucyjnej samą ustawę pozostawiając w zasadzie nietkniętą. Obecne badania konstytucyjne skupiają się na zagadnieniu słuszności jako narzędzia dla osądów. Główne założenie tego tekstu odnosi się jednak do tego, że zwiększenie zrozumienia dla roli słuszności, którą ona odgrywa w prawie konstytucyjnym jest powiązane z gruntownym podejściem językoznawczym. 

IT

L‘Autore analizza il concetto di ragionevolezza cosí come utilizzato nei sistemi giuridici di paesi diversi tenendo particolarmente in conto il confronto tra i paesi di tradizione continentale e quelli di common law. Più specificamente si analizza l‘utilizzo del concetto di ragionevolezza nel contesto giuridico e, specialmente, costituzionale. In quest‘ultimo caso, infatti, la ragionevolezza gioca un ruolo cruciale nel veicolare diversi valori e, di conseguenza, dare vita a differenti ―costituzionalismi‖. Infatti, questo concetto favorisce il dinamismo della cornice costituzionale pur mantenendo la Costituzione inalterata. Fino a questo momento la dottrina costituzionalistica ha analizzato il concetto di ragionevolezza come strumento del controllo di costituzionalità (cioè come uno dei possibili strumenti concettuali utilizzati per vagliare la compatibilità di un atto con la costituzione, come per esempio lo strict scrutiny da un lato e la proportionality dall‘altro). Al contrario, la tesi dell‘autore è che un solido contributo da parte della scienza della linguistica favorirebbe la comprensione del ruolo svolto dal concetto di ragionevolezza come minima moralia nel Diritto costituzionale.

Keywords

EN

legal reasonableness; linguistic approach; comparative constitutional law

PL

słuszność prawa; podejście językoznawcze; porównawcze prawo konstytucyjne; słuszność prawa; podejście językoznawcze; porównawcze prawo konstytucyjne

• Publisher: Uniwersytet im. Adama Mickiewicza w Poznaniu
• Journal: Comparative Legilinguistics
• Year: 2010
• Volume: 2
• Pages: 23-38

Dates

published

2017-02-07

Contributors

author

Sara PENNICINO

• Department of Comparative Law, University of Padua, Italy, Via 8 Febbraio, 2 - 35122 Padova

References

• Ajani, Gianmaria. 2003. Navigatori e giuristi. A proposito del trapianto di nozioni vaghe. In Io comparo, tu compari, egli compara: cosa, come, perchè?, ed. Valentina Bertorello, 3-19. Milano: Giuffré.
• Bradley, Anthony. 2007. The Sovereignty of Parliament - Form or Substance? In The Changing Constitution, ed. Jeffrey Jowell and Dawn Oliver, 26–61. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Choudhry, Sujit, The Migration in Comparative Constitutional Law. 2006. In The Migration of Constitutional Ideas, ed. Sujit Choudhry, 1–36. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Cohn, Ernest J., 1968. Manual of German Law. Vol. I. London: The British Institute of International and Comparative Law.
• Danneman, Gerhard. 1993. An Introduction to German Civil and Commercial Law, London: The British Institute of International and Comparative Law.
• Frosini, Justin O. and Lucio Pegoraro. 2008. Constitutional Courts in Latin America: a testing ground for new parameters of classification? Journal of Comparative Law 3: 39–63.
• Frosini, Justin O., Spasič, Ivana. 2006. Ombudsman u Srbiji – Neophodnost ili iluzija? In Pravda na tlu Europe. Zakonski principi u proširenoj Europi, ed. Justin O. Frosini, Michele A. Lupoi, Michele Marchesiello, 335–344. Sarajevo: Magistrat
• Sarajevo.
• Frosini, Justin Orlando. Constitutional Justice. In Introduction to Italian Public Law, ed. Giuseppe F. Ferrari, 183-210. Milano: Giuffrè.
• Frosini, Justin Orlando. 2008. Forms of state and forms of government. In Introduction to Italian Public Law, ed. Giuseppe F. Ferrari, 31-56. Milano: Giuffrè.
• Galgano, Francesco, 2002. Il Negozio Giuridico, Milano: Giuffré.
• Gambaro, Antonio. 2004. A proposito del plurilinguismo legislativo europeo. Riv. trim. di dir. e proc. civile, 2004: 287 ff.
• Garcia Belaunde, Domingo, Carlos Hakinsson Nieto, José F. Palomino Manchego, 2002. The Influence of Europe and the United States in Latin American constitutionalism. Constitutional safeguards and presidentialism. Bologna: Bonomo.
• Gerotto, Sergio, 2004, Giurisprudenza costituzionale in Svizzera nel biennio 2002-2003, in Giurisprudenza costituzionale, 5: 3651– 3680.
• Grande, Elisabetta. 2006. Comparative Law in Italy. In The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Law, ed. Mathias Reimann and Reinhard Zimmermann, 107–130. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Grosswald Curran, Vivian. 2006. Comparative Law and Language. In The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Law, ed. Mathias Reimann and Reinhard Zimmermann, 675–708. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Harding, Andrew and Peter Leyland, 2007. Comparative Law in a Constitutional Context. In Comparative Law a Handbook, ed. David Nelken and Esin Örücü, 313–338. Oxford: Hart.
• Leyland, Peter and Terry Woods, 2002. Administrative Law, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Örücü, Esin. 2007. Developing Comparative Law. In Comparative Law a Handbook, ed. David Nelken and Esin Örücü, 43–66. Oxford: Hart.
• Pozzo, Barbara. 2005. Ordinary Language and legal language. Milano: Giuffrè.
• R. Pound, Roscoe, 1923. The Theory of Judicial Decision I. The Materials of Judicial Decision, Harvard Law Review 36: 641–662.
• Sacco, Rodolfo. 1986. Les problèmes de traduction juridique. In Rapport Nationaux Italiens au XII Congrès International de Droit Comparé, Sidney.
• Wade, Henry W.R., and Christopher F. Forsyth. 2004. Administrative Law, 9° ed., Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• List of cases:
• UK Courts
• Rooke's Case (1598) Co Rep 99b
• Keighley's Case (1609) 10 Co. Rep. 139a.
• Estwick v. City of London (1647) Style 42.
• Leader v. Moxon (1773) 2 W. Bl. 924.
• Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v. Wednesbury
• Corporation (1948) 1 KB 223.
• Council of Civil Service Unions v. Minister for the Civil Service (1985) AC 374.
• R. v. Secretary of state for the Environment ex p. Nottinghamshire CC (1986) AC 240
• R. v. Home Secretary ex p. Brind (1991) 1 AC 696.
• R. (Jackson) v. Attorney- General [2005] UKHL 56.
• U.S. Courts
• Munn v. Illinois, 94 U.S. 113 (1877).
• Lochner v. New York, 198 U.S. 45 (1905).
• United States v. Carolene Products Co., 304 U.S. (1938).
• French Courts
• Conseil d'État 15 février 1961 Lagrange : Rec. p. 121.
• Italian Courts
• Con. St. sed. plen., n. 3/1993
• Corte cost. sent. n. 5 del 1980
• Corte cost. sent. n. 61 del 1957
• ECtHR
• Scordino c. Italia (1) – Grande Camera, sentenza 29 marzo 2006 (ricorso n. 36813/97)1.

Identifiers

DOI

10.14746/cl.2010.2.02