Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1609612
 
 

References (11)



 


 



Arguing About Goals: The Diminishing Scope of Legal Reasoning


Pauline C. Westerman


Faculty of Law, University of Groningen

November 1, 2008


Abstract:     
This article investigates the implications of goal-legislation for legal argumentation. In goal-regulation the legislator formulates the aims to be reached, leaving it to the norm-addressee to draft the necessary rules. On the basis of six types of hard cases, it is argued that in such a system there is hardly room for constructing a ratio legis. Legal interpretation is largely reduced to concretisation. This implies that legal argumentation tends to become highly dependent on expert (non-legal) knowledge.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 16

Keywords: Expert-knowledge, framework directives, hard cases, legal argumentation, legislation, ratio legis, regulation.

working papers series


Download This Paper

Date posted: May 17, 2010  

Suggested Citation

Westerman, Pauline C., Arguing About Goals: The Diminishing Scope of Legal Reasoning (November 1, 2008). Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1609612 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1609612

Contact Information

Pauline C. Westerman (Contact Author)
Faculty of Law, University of Groningen ( email )
9700 AS Groningen
Netherlands

Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 329
Downloads: 115
Download Rank: 136,937
References:  11

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo5 in 0.797 seconds