Insights, Errors and Self‐Misconceptions of the Theory of Principles

Abstract

The theory of principles is multifaceted. Its initial expression contained an important argument against positivist theories of adjudication. As a legal theory, it fails in its effort to claim a structural difference between rules and principles. It also fails as a methodological theory that reduces adjudication to subsumption or balancing. It misunderstands itself when it is conceived as a doctrinal theory especially of fundamental rights. Its most promising aspect could be its contribution to a more comprehensive theory of legal argumentation.

What Does It Take to Become a CPT?

“…Generally there are criteria that accompany each principle to set expectations of adherence by the members (Poscher, 2009). You might ask why it is necessary to go through the work of defining a set of standards.…”

Legal principles in Croatian Legal Science: Fundamental Character and Indeterminacy

“…34 it is a characteristic which depends on an evaluation and "value-judgment about the relative 'importance' of that norm within the legal system as a whole and/or within some particular part of the system (...)". 35…”

Analogija U Pravu: Značenje I Upotreba

“…Niža premisa: svojstvo A je istinito (pogrešno) u slučaju C1 Zaključak: svojstvo A je istinito (pogrešno) u slučaju C2. 32 Možemo primijetiti da je ovaj način zaključivanja isti kao i kod Waltonove prve sheme. 33 Juthe razlikuje četiri temeljna argumenta, od kojih je jedan argument na temelju analogije.…”

“…Načela se pak mogu razumjeti kao optimizacijski zahtjevi. 116 I Alexyjeva i Dworkinova teorija načela kažu da u pravu postoje dvije vrste normi: pravila i načela. Pravila ne prave poseban problem, jer ona mogu biti primijenjena supsumpcijom, dok su načela interesantnija, i mogu biti primijenjena balansiranjem s drugim načelima i normama.…”