Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 10

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  legal reasoning
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
EN
The civil law system entered the codification path during the 19th century, enabling the creation of uniformity, such as drafting a civil code and building a new (national) identity. The structure of the code suggests that it provides a comprehensive, internally coherent set of rules for private law. The adopted civil codes secure lawyers a systematic and coherent foundation for the legal system and legal reasoning. Codification allowed laws to be in an easily identified document easily. Traditionally, the civil law system has been subject to several codification and consolidation processes during different periods in time, influenced from political, social or economic reforms. In Albania after the proclamation of the Monarchy, work began on the preparation of various codes, with the crucial one being the Civil Code. The first Albanian Civil Code entered in force on the 1st of April 1929. This process was the first step for the Albanian Legislator to compare the secularity of the European legal framework to that of the Ottoman Empire. In 1991, the end of the communist era in Albania was marked by bringing the transformation of the economy into a market-oriented system and the creation of a legal system that protected the right of private property. The Albanian system as a continental system has developed a system based on systematic approach to laws, a procedure known as dogmatic approach. It has created an internal system of laws based on generally codified norms and principles. The purpose of this paper is to explain the impact of political, social or economic reforms in the codification process and the nature of legal sources in Albania.
EN
The article is devoted to chronological logic and its applications in the analysis of legal reasoning. In Part I of the paper, there is given that time plays an important role in statutory law, in language of the law and in legal language appear many time expressions, and formal logic provides tools to logical analysis of reasoning performed in everyday discourse and in various sciences, also in legal discourse and in legal sciences. There are presented also conditions that temporal systems should satisfy to be used in an analysis of legal reasoning. In Part II of the paper, the origins and the profile of chronological logic are presented. Part III, the last part of the article, presents examples of formalization of some sentences of legal language containing at the time phrase, and of legal reasoning composed of such sentences, by means of symbols occurring in chronological logic. The position presented in the article says that some temporal logic could be used in a logical analysis such legal reasoning that would contain references to time. The main task of chronological logic would be then providing formal language to more precise express statements of legal language containing given time expression (exactly at the time phrase) and to model legal reasoning containing such expression; and also giving tools to evaluate formal correctness of these inferences.
3
63%
PL
Celem artykułu jest prezentacja modelu rozumowań prawniczych opartego na pojęciu koherencji (spójności) wypracowanym przez nauki kognitywne. Mówiąc dokładniej, model ten, określany dalej jako koherencyjny MRP (Model Rozumowania Prawniczego), jest bazowany na teorii koherencji wypracowanej przez Paula Thagarda. Zdaniem autora koherencyjny MRP wydaje się w sposób bardzo satyfakcjonujący spełniać kryteria zazwyczaj wykorzystywane w ocenie teoretycznoprawnych modeli argumentacji. Jest on w stanie przedstawić wnioskowanie prawnicze czy to jako sieć neuronową, czy też – bardziej tradycyjnie – jako sformalizowaną grę argumentacyjną. W konsekwencji koherencyjny MRP oferuje obiecującą „trzecią drogę” wobec tradycyjnych dedukcyjnych i niededukcyjnych modeli wnioskowań prawniczych.
EN
The aim of the article is to present a model of legal reasoning based of the concept of coherence, as this concept is understood in recent developments of cognitive science. More precisely, the model, hereafter referred to as CMLR (Coherence Model of Legal Reasoning) is based on the constraint satisfaction theory of coherence, elaborated and defended by Paul Thagard. The claim of the author is that CMLR appears very satisfactory when assessed against criteria typically employed for evaluation of legal-theoretical models of argumentation. It is able to represent legal reasoning either as a neural network or, more traditionally, as a formal dialogue game. In consequence, CMLR offers a plausible “third road” between traditional deductive and non-deductive models of legal thinking.
PL
Podstawową tezą pracy jest stwierdzenie ewolucyjności (dwuetapowości) teorii rozumowania prawniczego Neila MacCormicka. Dlatego też została ona omówiona przy użyciu metody diachronicznej. Najpierw zaprezentowano podstawowe elementy teorii rozumowania prawniczego składające się na dzieło Legal Reasoning and Legal Theory (1978). Następnie spróbowano – na przykładzie Rhetoric and the Rule of Law (2005) przedstawić kluczowe zmiany, jakie na przestrzeni lat dokonały się w podejściu MacCormicka do zagadnień związanych z teorią rozumowania prawniczego. Najważniejszą z nich wydaje się stopniowa rewizja poglądów szkockiego filozofa dotycząca roli wnioskowania dedukcyjnego w procesie rozumowania sędziowskiego. Prowadzi ona do rozszerzenia logicznych aspektów teorii rozumowania prawniczego MacCormicka (sylogizm prawniczy) o aspekty retoryczne (argumentacyjność prawa) oraz etyczne (idea rządów prawa). Ewolucja teorii rozumowania prawniczego MacCormick może być uważana za modelowy przykład zmian zachodzących we współczesnej filozofii prawa.
EN
This paper traces, examines, and demonstrates Neil MacCormick’s theory of legal reasoning and its evolution. MacCormick’s views were shaped gradually so his theory could be divided into two main stages. Therefore, the use of the diachronic approach is justified. The aim of this paper is to analyse the difference between the theses of the theory of legal reasoning explained in Legal Reasoning and Legal Theory (1978) and general revisions to this theory marked in Rhetoric and the Rule of Law (2005). According to the author, the most important change in MacCormick’s theory of legal reasoning is an examination of the role of deductive reasoning in the process of judicial reasoning. This change leads to an extension of the logical aspects of MacCormick’s theory of legal reasoning (legal syllogism) to include rhetorical aspects (argumentative character of law) and ethical aspects (the idea of the rule of law). The evolution of the MacCormick’s theory of legal reasoning seems to be a model example of the changes in contemporary philosophy of law.
PL
Artykuł ukazuje niektóre problemy związane z formalizacją wnioskowań prawniczych w trybie analogia legis oraz w trybie a contrario, a także omawia wybrane, charakterystyczne propozycje w tym zakresie. Budowane sformalizowane modele są oparte na pojęciach logiki monotonicznej oraz logik niemonotonicznych. Modele te mają głównie charakter poglądowy i posiadają ograniczoną moc wyjaśniającą. Ich niezawodność może być uzyskana tylko przy spełnieniu pewnych dodatkowych warunków.
EN
The paper shows some of the problems related to the formalization of legal reasonings under analogia legis and a contrario, and discusses some of the specific proposals in this regard. Built formal models are based on the concept of monotonic logic and nonmonotonic logic. These models are mainly illustrative and have limited explanatory power. Their reliability can only be achieved under certain additional conditions.
PL
The purpose of this paper is to describe the application of artificial neural networks in modeling legal reasoning. In particular, the paper will be focused on specific problems which may occur only on the ground of legal reasoning and are difficult from the artificial intelligence perspective. The focal point of the paper is not to provide technical details of analyzed systems but to point out parts of legal conceptual framework which are inconsistent with classical techniques of designing of expert system. Paper consists description of a few legal expert systems based on artificial neural networks. Each of them is the basis for presentation of particular feature of legal reasoning which are considered difficult from the AI point of view e.g. vague concepts, open-texture, analogy.
PL
Artykuł prezentuje rozumowanie praktyczne w świetle nowej teorii prawa naturalnego Johna M. Finnisa. Teorię Johna M. Finnisa można nazwać nową teorią prawa naturalnego, ponieważ jego poglądy były kształtowane zarówno przez św. Tomasza z Akwinu, jak też częściowo były zainspirowane nowym jego odczytaniem przez Germaina Griseza. Podstawowym celem artykułu jest analiza koncepcji rozumowania prawniczego jako rozumowania praktycznego, będącej w zamiarze Johna M. Finnisa przede wszystkim mocną krytyką teorii Ronalda Dworkina opartej na założeniu istnienia jednej właściwej odpowiedzi. Według autora tego artykułu, krytyczne podejście Johna M. Finnisa do teorii Ronalda Dworkina prowadzi jego koncepcję rozumowania prawniczego – sformułowaną na fundamencie prawa naturalnego – do stopniowego rozszerzenia o aspekty pozytywistyczne (zbliżenie z poglądami Josepha Raza) oraz aspekty instytucjonalne (zbliżenie z poglądami Neila MacCormicka). Dlatego też teoria rozumowania prawniczego Finnisa wydaje się być modelowym przykładem zbliżenia prawa naturalnego i pozytywizmu prawniczego we współczesnej filozofii prawa.
EN
This paper presents practical reasoning in the light of John M. Finnis’ new natural law theory. Finnis’ views were shaped by Aquinas’ thoughts on natural law but he was also strongly inspired by Germain Grisez’ new approach, so his theory could be named a new natural law theory. The aim of this paper is to analyse the concept of legal reasoning as practical reasoning, which Finnis intended mainly as a strong critique of Ronald Dworkin’s theory of legal reasoning based on the concept of the one right answer. According to the author of this paper, Finnis’ critical approach to Dworkin leads to a gradual extension of the former’s concept of legal reasoning to include positivistic aspects (rapprochement with Joseph Raz’ views) and institutional aspects (rapprochement with Neil MacCormick’s views). Therefore, Finnis’ theory of legal reasoning seems to be a model example of the rapprochement between natural law and legal positivism in contemporary philosophy of law.
EN
Legal reasoning is an important element of drafting and applying law. It is done at several stages: 1) a debate during the legislative process; 2) reasoning of the entity applying the law; 3) a judicial discourse and 4) an academic assessment of judicial decisions. In drafting and applying law, the legislators, law users, judges and glossators touch upon a certain norm-creating concept. Following the Platonian concept, we can conclude that the concept is a certain idea which may be interpreted in several stages. With the example of a selected provision from the Act on the Relationship between the State and the Catholic Church in the Republic of Poland, the author of the paper indicates the role of legal reasoning in drafting and applying law at every stage. The most important thing is to interpret the ideal norm in a correct way and clearly draft it as a legal act. Correct performance of this procedure will facilitate further stages of applying the law.
PL
Rozumowanie prawnicze stanowi istotny element tworzenia i stosowania prawa. Dokonywane jest ono na kilku etapach: 1) debata towarzysząca tworzeniu prawa, 2) rozumowanie podmiotu stosującego prawo, 3) dyskurs sądowy i wreszcie 4) doktrynalna ocena rozstrzygnięć judykatury. W stanowieniu i stosowaniu prawa prawodawcy, użytkownicy, sędziowie i glosatorzy dotykają pewnej określonej koncepcji tworzącej normę prawną. Nawiązując do platońskiego zamysłu, można stwierdzić, iż owa koncepcja stanowi pewien byt idealny, który jest odczytywany na poszczególnych etapach. Na przykładzie wybranego przepisu z ustawy o stosunku Państwa do Kościoła katolickiego w RP autor artykułu wskazuje na rolę rozumowań prawniczych w tworzeniu i stosowaniu prawa na wszystkich etapach. Najistotniejsze jest właściwe odczytanie idealnego bytu prawnego oraz klarowne zapisanie go w treści aktów prawnych. Poprawne wykonanie tego zabiegu ułatwi dalsze etapy stosowania prawa.
EN
The subject of the consideration contained in the article is topological logic interpreted as place logic and its possible applications in a logical analysis of legal reasoning. The first part of the article is about significance of widely understood spatial element in a law and about a role of formal logic in legal sciences (especially in dogmatic of law) and in legal discourse. There are also given conditions imposed on logical systems which can be applied to analyse legal reasoning. In the second part there is characterization of topological logic interpreted as place logic. In the third part there are examples of formalization of sentences of legal language and of legal inferences using symbols occurring in place logic. In the article there is shown that such kind of logic can be applied to logical analysis some reasoning conducted in legal language, specifically such reasoning in which there appear sentences including, in an explicit or a hidden way, phrase “in place”, that is, information about that, where certain events are realized.
EN
Following a brief introduction of article 6 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the author begins by analyzing case law from the European Court of Human Rights regarding the legal reasoning in judicial proceedings. The main premise of this paper is to present a formula for preparing legal reasoning in administrative court proceedings. The author draws attention to the role of judges who, in the process of adjudication, should apply creative interpretation of the rules of law, when they see errors or omissions in legislative provisions, or blatant violations of the European legal order. The conclusion of those deliberations finds, that the process of tailoring the approach to meet Strasbourg’s requirements should, on a basic level, be at the discretion of judges rather than the legislators.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.