界定法律习惯概念的现代途径

M.M. Bedrii
{"title":"界定法律习惯概念的现代途径","authors":"M.M. Bedrii","doi":"10.24144/2788-6018.2023.04.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article is devoted to approaches to understanding the concept of legal custom existing in modern legal literature. The correlation between the variety of definitions of legal custom and the pluralism of legal understanding is noted. The positivist influence on the understanding of legal custom through the prism of its definitions is highlighted. It is proposed to classify the definitions of legal custom existing in Ukrainian jurisprudence according to the criterion of the presence of an indication of the sanctioning of the custom by the state. According to the specified criterion, they can be divided into the following groups: definitions indicating state sanctioning; those that do not contain the mentioned requirement; definitions in which state sanctioning of legal custom is considered as its optional (additional) feature.The definition of the concept of legal custom proposed in both scientific and educational literature on the theory and history of law, as well as other subjects (including in textbooks on customary law) was researched. In particular, more than twenty definitions of legal custom and customary law presented in the works of T. Andrusiak, S. Bilostotskyi, O. Ivanovska, M. Koziubra, L. Luts, O. Miroshnychenko, P. Rabinovych, O. Skakun, V. Sukhonos, O. Shevchenko, I. Usenko, O. Vasianovych, O. Yavorska, M. Zhovtobriukh and others. For comparative purposes, the article describes the approaches to understanding customary law of several foreign legal scholars (B. Benson, J. Murphy, A. Preisner) and representatives of related fields of knowledge.It has been found that some definitions of legal custom use terms close in meaning instead of state sanctioning, which, however, are not identical to this phenomenon – for example, social sanction (sanctioning by society, not the state) or state approval. Such approval should probably be understood somewhat more broadly than sanctioning (which is a type of approval), but narrower than recognition. The latter does not always imply approval, which is a positive reaction, unlike recognition, which can be both positive and neutral.","PeriodicalId":474211,"journal":{"name":"Analìtično-porìvnâlʹne pravoznavstvo","volume":"31 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Modern approaches to defining the concept of legal custom\",\"authors\":\"M.M. Bedrii\",\"doi\":\"10.24144/2788-6018.2023.04.1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The article is devoted to approaches to understanding the concept of legal custom existing in modern legal literature. The correlation between the variety of definitions of legal custom and the pluralism of legal understanding is noted. The positivist influence on the understanding of legal custom through the prism of its definitions is highlighted. It is proposed to classify the definitions of legal custom existing in Ukrainian jurisprudence according to the criterion of the presence of an indication of the sanctioning of the custom by the state. According to the specified criterion, they can be divided into the following groups: definitions indicating state sanctioning; those that do not contain the mentioned requirement; definitions in which state sanctioning of legal custom is considered as its optional (additional) feature.The definition of the concept of legal custom proposed in both scientific and educational literature on the theory and history of law, as well as other subjects (including in textbooks on customary law) was researched. In particular, more than twenty definitions of legal custom and customary law presented in the works of T. Andrusiak, S. Bilostotskyi, O. Ivanovska, M. Koziubra, L. Luts, O. Miroshnychenko, P. Rabinovych, O. Skakun, V. Sukhonos, O. Shevchenko, I. Usenko, O. Vasianovych, O. Yavorska, M. Zhovtobriukh and others. For comparative purposes, the article describes the approaches to understanding customary law of several foreign legal scholars (B. Benson, J. Murphy, A. Preisner) and representatives of related fields of knowledge.It has been found that some definitions of legal custom use terms close in meaning instead of state sanctioning, which, however, are not identical to this phenomenon – for example, social sanction (sanctioning by society, not the state) or state approval. Such approval should probably be understood somewhat more broadly than sanctioning (which is a type of approval), but narrower than recognition. The latter does not always imply approval, which is a positive reaction, unlike recognition, which can be both positive and neutral.\",\"PeriodicalId\":474211,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Analìtično-porìvnâlʹne pravoznavstvo\",\"volume\":\"31 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Analìtično-porìvnâlʹne pravoznavstvo\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.24144/2788-6018.2023.04.1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Analìtično-porìvnâlʹne pravoznavstvo","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24144/2788-6018.2023.04.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文致力于理解现代法律文献中存在的法律习俗概念的方法。注意到法律习惯定义的多样性与法律理解的多元性之间的相互关系。通过法律习俗定义的棱镜,实证主义对理解法律习俗的影响是突出的。建议根据是否存在国家对该习惯进行制裁的迹象这一标准,对乌克兰法理学中现有的法律习惯定义进行分类。根据规定的标准,它们可分为以下几组:表示国家制裁的定义;不具备上述条件的;国家对法律习俗的认可被认为是其可选(附加)特征的定义。研究了法律理论和法律历史的科学和教育文献以及其他学科(包括习惯法教科书)中提出的法律习惯概念的定义。特别是,T. Andrusiak、S. Bilostotskyi、O. Ivanovska、M. Koziubra、L. Luts、O. Miroshnychenko、P. Rabinovych、O. Skakun、V. Sukhonos、O.舍甫琴科、I. Usenko、O. Vasianovych、O. Yavorska、M. Zhovtobriukh等人的著作中提出了二十多个法律习俗和习惯法的定义。出于比较的目的,本文介绍了几位外国法律学者(B. Benson、J. Murphy、A. Preisner)和相关知识领域的代表对习惯法的理解方法。我们发现,一些法律习俗的定义使用的是意义相近的术语,而不是国家制裁,但这与这一现象并不相同,例如社会制裁(社会制裁,而不是国家制裁)或国家批准。这种认可可能应该比制裁(这是一种认可)更广泛地理解,但比认可更狭隘。后者并不总是意味着肯定,这是一种积极的反应,不像认可,它可以是积极的和中立的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Modern approaches to defining the concept of legal custom
The article is devoted to approaches to understanding the concept of legal custom existing in modern legal literature. The correlation between the variety of definitions of legal custom and the pluralism of legal understanding is noted. The positivist influence on the understanding of legal custom through the prism of its definitions is highlighted. It is proposed to classify the definitions of legal custom existing in Ukrainian jurisprudence according to the criterion of the presence of an indication of the sanctioning of the custom by the state. According to the specified criterion, they can be divided into the following groups: definitions indicating state sanctioning; those that do not contain the mentioned requirement; definitions in which state sanctioning of legal custom is considered as its optional (additional) feature.The definition of the concept of legal custom proposed in both scientific and educational literature on the theory and history of law, as well as other subjects (including in textbooks on customary law) was researched. In particular, more than twenty definitions of legal custom and customary law presented in the works of T. Andrusiak, S. Bilostotskyi, O. Ivanovska, M. Koziubra, L. Luts, O. Miroshnychenko, P. Rabinovych, O. Skakun, V. Sukhonos, O. Shevchenko, I. Usenko, O. Vasianovych, O. Yavorska, M. Zhovtobriukh and others. For comparative purposes, the article describes the approaches to understanding customary law of several foreign legal scholars (B. Benson, J. Murphy, A. Preisner) and representatives of related fields of knowledge.It has been found that some definitions of legal custom use terms close in meaning instead of state sanctioning, which, however, are not identical to this phenomenon – for example, social sanction (sanctioning by society, not the state) or state approval. Such approval should probably be understood somewhat more broadly than sanctioning (which is a type of approval), but narrower than recognition. The latter does not always imply approval, which is a positive reaction, unlike recognition, which can be both positive and neutral.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信