ASSIGNMENT代写

澳洲莫纳什代写作业:理解法律实践

2018-11-01 23:45

理解法律实践的唯一途径似乎是在实践中考虑参与者的解释性观点。德沃金声称,当法官(以及律师)考虑哪种方式是解决法律问题的最佳方式时,他们不应该简单地确定哪一种实证法适用于某一案件,而应该将解释法作为社会实践。德沃金强调,对某一案件的解决总是通过解释实践来寻求。德沃金的观点与因袭主义者的观点完全相反,因袭主义者坚持认为,在处理某一案件时,法官只应该确切地确定适用什么法律。此外,德沃金指出,在辩论中一定的情况下,律师提出不同的意见和观点,在这种情况下,决定适用法律的情况下通常是基于法律意见,在一个特定的问题而不是约定适用。因此,这种辩论的参与者不试图将案件的事实与假定的适用法律联系起来,而是根据一般的规范性理由或其中所表达的道德观点来解释法律。“一个解释社会实践的参与者。根据这一观点,通过描述一些利益方案、目标或原则来提出实践的价值,实践可以被用来服务、表达或举例。
澳洲莫纳什代写作业:理解法律实践
 The only way to understand legal practice seems to be that—taking the interpretative perspectives of the participant into consider in the practice. Dworkin claims that when judges (as well as lawyers) consider which way is the best to solve a legal issue, they should not simply identify exactly what positive law is applicable in a certain case, but taking an interpretative approach to law as social practice. Dworkin emphasizes that a solution to a certain case is always sought out through a matter of interpretative practice. Dworkin’s perspective here is quite against that of conventionalists, the conventionalists insist that in dealing with a certain case, the judge only should identify exactly what law is applicable. Furthermore, Dworkin points out that in the debate of a certain case, different opinions and arguments are raised by lawyers, and under this circumstance, the decision of what law is applicable in the case is usually based on what opinion the law amounts to in a particular matter rather than what conventions apply. Participants in such a debate thus do not attempt to link the facts of a case with the supposedly posited law applicable but rather interpret the law in light of a general normative justification or moral point expressed in it. “A participant interpreting a social practice [i.e. the law], according to that view, proposes value for the practice by describing some scheme of interest or goals or principles the practice can be taken to serve or express or exemplify.