Theory of Legal Interpretation and Contextualism
In this essay I will attempt to answer the critical observations made by Kristan, Poggi and Vignolo of my theory of legal interpretation. I express the opinion that, apart from some gaps and defects to be addressed, my theory can satisfactorily overcome this criticism. In answering these observation...
محفوظ في:
| الحاوية / القاعدة: | URI:https://journals.openedition.org/revus, |
|---|---|
| المؤلف الرئيسي: | |
| التنسيق: | Article ou chapitre numérique |
| اللغة: | Anglais |
| منشور في: |
Revus
2013
|
| الموضوعات: | |
| الوصول للمادة أونلاين: | Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM |
| الملخص: | In this essay I will attempt to answer the critical observations made by Kristan, Poggi and Vignolo of my theory of legal interpretation. I express the opinion that, apart from some gaps and defects to be addressed, my theory can satisfactorily overcome this criticism. In answering these observations, I again stress the fruitfulness of moderate contextualism as a semantical point of reference for legal interpretation, also striving to deepen the notion of “background context”, and to clarify the differences among four types of interpretative disagreements. I also maintain that the most important and problematic issues in interpretative legal practices today are those which express, as in bioethics, profound intensional divergences. |
|---|