How can legal interpretation change the legal order into legal disorder? : (Lessons from the Czech Republic)

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00216208%3A11220%2F23%3A10458492" target="_blank" >RIV/00216208:11220/23:10458492 - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=Ipn3fhzMrR" target="_blank" >https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=Ipn3fhzMrR</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

—

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

How can legal interpretation change the legal order into legal disorder? : (Lessons from the Czech Republic)

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

An opinion long prevailed in the Czech Republic that a judge is bound, in his decision-making, only by statutory law and by international treaties which, according to the Constitution of the Czech Republic, have priority over statutory law. The fact that a judge is bound by statutory law was mostly understood in that the judge is bound by the &quot;word of the statutes&quot;. A judge thus could not be formally bound by someone else&apos;s interpretation of the statutes, i.e. by case law. However, both these basic assumptions began to change radically in the Czech Republic, especially following the adoption of the new Civil Code in 2012. This article therefore aims to present the transformations in the binding effect of case law in the Czech Republic at the beginning of the 21st century and, in doing go, it will concentrate on the yet insufficiently examined question of limits to judicial law-making in the sense of constructive interpretation of statutory law by courts.When a judge applies the law, and thus necessarily also interprets it, he must ask two fundamental questions: (i) Whether he/she is bound by interpretation of the statutory law which has already been provided by someone else, and the judge is thus obliged to adhere to this line of interpretation. (ii) How should he/she proceed in the interpretation, which comprises the question of what methods of interpretation he/she should use, in what order and what significance should be attached to these methods?The ambition of this article is to show why a &quot;discursive&quot; or &quot;conditional binding effect of case law&quot;, on the one hand, and a judge&apos;s competence to interpret the law, on the other hand, can lead to fragmentation of the Czech legal order and contribute to transformation of the law from an order to a disorder, and how these unfavourable tendencies can be eliminated, or at least mitigated.

Název v anglickém jazyce

How can legal interpretation change the legal order into legal disorder? : (Lessons from the Czech Republic)

Popis výsledku anglicky

An opinion long prevailed in the Czech Republic that a judge is bound, in his decision-making, only by statutory law and by international treaties which, according to the Constitution of the Czech Republic, have priority over statutory law. The fact that a judge is bound by statutory law was mostly understood in that the judge is bound by the &quot;word of the statutes&quot;. A judge thus could not be formally bound by someone else&apos;s interpretation of the statutes, i.e. by case law. However, both these basic assumptions began to change radically in the Czech Republic, especially following the adoption of the new Civil Code in 2012. This article therefore aims to present the transformations in the binding effect of case law in the Czech Republic at the beginning of the 21st century and, in doing go, it will concentrate on the yet insufficiently examined question of limits to judicial law-making in the sense of constructive interpretation of statutory law by courts.When a judge applies the law, and thus necessarily also interprets it, he must ask two fundamental questions: (i) Whether he/she is bound by interpretation of the statutory law which has already been provided by someone else, and the judge is thus obliged to adhere to this line of interpretation. (ii) How should he/she proceed in the interpretation, which comprises the question of what methods of interpretation he/she should use, in what order and what significance should be attached to these methods?The ambition of this article is to show why a &quot;discursive&quot; or &quot;conditional binding effect of case law&quot;, on the one hand, and a judge&apos;s competence to interpret the law, on the other hand, can lead to fragmentation of the Czech legal order and contribute to transformation of the law from an order to a disorder, and how these unfavourable tendencies can be eliminated, or at least mitigated.

Druh

J_imp - Článek v periodiku v databázi Web of Science

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

50501 - Law

Projekt

<a href="/cs/project/GA19-10723S" target="_blank" >GA19-10723S: Co současné právo sjednocuje a co jej fragmentarizuje z pohledu právní teorie a soudní praxe?</a><br>

Návaznosti

P - Projekt vyzkumu a vyvoje financovany z verejnych zdroju (s odkazem do CEP)

Rok uplatnění

2023

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

Review of Central and East European Law

ISSN

0925-9880

e-ISSN

1573-0352

Svazek periodika

2023

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

48

Stát vydavatele periodika

NL - Nizozemsko

Počet stran výsledku

31

Strana od-do

32-62

Kód UT WoS článku

000972709000002

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

—