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

Results found: 2

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  methodology of legal sciences
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
EN
The article discusses issues related to the systematisation of legal events, indicating that it is not possible to create an uncontested systematisation of legal events. Systematization units distinguished in civil law must meet certain methodological standards. Forgiveness should be classified as an act similar to legal acts. Classifying forgiveness as an emotional act is not accurate. The mere use of the category of “emotional acts” is incorrect. The correct classification of a particular legal event (e.g. forgiveness) at least facilitates the correct interpretation of the provisions linking specific legal effects to such an event (e.g. forgiveness). The thesis of the Supreme Court's resolution that forgiveness excludes the effectiveness of disinheritance even if it has been effected after the drawing up of a will containing disinheritance, regardless of the form in which it was effected (Article 1010 of the Civil Code), seems pertinent. However, it was very unconvincingly substantiated.
EN
The paper is an attempt to argue for the methodological distinctiveness of legal sciences. The methodological distinctiveness (specificity) of legal sciences has been presented in three dimensions: 1) the subject; 2) methods and 3) purpose of scientific research. The analysis can be used both for the argument against the lack of a methodological identity of the legal sciences and positively for the comprehensive research and the integrative model of the legal sciences. In view of the complexity of the subject and the aims of legal science should be used various research methods. In further research, it would be advisable to establish their possible systems in a specific research problem.
PL
Artykuł stanowi argumentację na rzecz metodologicznej odrębności nauk prawnych. Metodologiczna odrębność (swoistość) nauk prawnych została przedstawiona w trzech wymiarach: 1) przedmiotu; 2) metody i 3) celu badań naukowych. Analiza może być wykorzystana zarówno jako argument przeciwko braku tożsamości metodologicznej nauk prawnych, jak i pozytywnie dla całościowego i integracyjnego modelu nauk prawnych. Ze względu na złożoność przedmiotu i celów nauk prawnych należy stosować różne metody badawcze. W dalszych badaniach wskazane byłoby ustalenie ich możliwych systemów w określonym problemie badawczym.
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.