The Interpretation of Court Opinions

IF 0.4 Q3 LAW

Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence Pub Date : 2020-10-08 DOI:10.1017/cjlj.2021.20

Clovis Kemmerich

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract What kind of argument is acceptable for this or that interpretation when the text is a court’s opinion? There is plenty of discussion about literary, constitutional, and statutory interpretation. Is it acceptable to import their tenets or theories to the interpretation of court opinions? This paper goes over the leading views on literary, constitutional, and statutory interpretation to compare them with the needs of the court opinions’ interpretation. The author argues that one must interpret court opinions according to the pragmatic model and endeavor to understand the meaning the judge intended for the text.

查看原文本刊更多论文

法院意见的解释

当文本是法院的意见时，什么样的论证可以接受这种或那种解释?有很多关于文学、宪法和法律解释的讨论。在解释法院意见时，是否可以引入他们的原则或理论?本文回顾了文学解释、宪法解释和法律解释的主要观点，并将它们与法院意见解释的需要进行了比较。作者认为，人们必须根据语用模式来解释法院意见，并努力理解法官对文本的意图。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence LAW-

CiteScore

1.10

自引率

16.70%

发文量

期刊介绍： The Canadian Journal of Law & Jurisprudence serves as a forum for special and general jurisprudence and legal philosophy. It publishes articles that address the nature of law, that engage in philosophical analysis or criticism of legal doctrine, that examine the form and nature of legal or judicial reasoning, that investigate issues concerning the ethical aspects of legal practice, and that study (from a philosophical perspective) concrete legal issues facing contemporary society. The journal does not use case notes, nor does it publish articles focussing on issues particular to the laws of a single nation. The Canadian Journal of Law & Jurisprudence is published on behalf of the Faculty of Law, Western University.