Interpretation Law: While the common law tradition takes cases as its starting point, the civil law tradition that prevails in the European continent focuses on rule-based reasoning. In order to allow legal decision-makers to reach the desired conclusions through these laws, so-called rules of interpretation were developed by which the conclusions of the rules could be adapted to the needs of concrete cases.
Lexical principle or grammatical interpretation
Sometimes it is necessary to decide on the proper scope of application of a principle. For example, does the principle of prohibiting the presence of dogs in the butchery also applies to guide dogs? If there is a problem with the guide dog in the butchery, it is important to decide whether the guide dog is a dog according to the rules, and this decision should be encouraging.
One way to motivate the interpretation Law of a rule is that the interpretation matches the literal meaning of the words of the rule. Guide dogs are dogs, aren’t they? Therefore, a dog guide also applies to dogs. The principle of statutory interpretation that states that the rules should be interpreted literally are called.
The “literal rule”, and the resulting interpretation is called “grammatical” or “literal interpretation”.
Naughty rules or legislative intent Often, written rules are made to solve certain problems. The legislature was meant to achieve specific results, and the principle was seen as a means to achieve those results. If a legislator interprets a rule in a way that makes it in accordance with the legislature’s intentions, he is said to be applying the principle of mischief.
Suppose the legislature has banned dogs in slaughterhouses to prevent unhealthy conditions in food shops. He considered the issue of guide dogs but nevertheless decided not to be exempt from it as hygiene was considered very important. If a legal decision-maker wants to follow the legislation’s intent, he or she must explain the principle so that it can be applied to guide dogs as well.
The Golden Rule Purpose or teleological interpretation
When a spokesman sees the purpose of a rule, he can go back to the intention of the legislator who made the rule. This is the principle of mischief. However, he himself can try to determine the purpose of the rule. The decision-maker applies the so-called golden rule when we speak of objective or teleological interpretation law.
Suppose again that the legislature has banned the use of dogs in butchers to prevent unhealthy conditions in food shops. If a legal decision-maker acknowledges this interest but considers the interest of the visually impaired to be more important, he or she may interpret the rule so that guide dogs are excluded from the scope of the rule.
- Nuisance Law Example – What is a Public Nuisance?
- Proximate Cause – What is the meaning of proximate cause?
- Defamation Law – What is an example of defamation?
- Equity vs equality – What is an example of equity law?
Theories of interpretation of statutes Lawyer’s toolbox
We have seen that a legal decision-maker who has to justify his choice to formulate a particular rule has a choice of different techniques. Some of these techniques are relatively formal: the decision-maker refers to another, legislator, or court decision, and avoids making a valuable decision himself.
Other techniques are more important: The decision-maker is busy arguing about what a good principle would be. He decides his own value and bases his interpretation Law of the principle on that value decision. However, in both cases, the decision-maker has to choose a technique.
Different legal sources, reasoning techniques, and principles of interpretation of statutes act can be compared to a set of decision-making tools in a lawyer’s toolbox. Depending on the needs of the case, a legal decision-maker chooses a tool that will help him reach the desired result. In this regard, it has a special way.