Alfonsas Vaišvila, celebrating his 70th jubilee birthday, was honoured for and most notably landmark work, “Teisės teorija,” (Theory of Law). Alfonsas Vaišvila, Mykolo Romerio universitetas;. Doc. dr. Vigintas Višinskis . Lietuvos ekologinės teisės paskirtį atspindinčių teisinių kategorijų tapatumo paieška teorijoje bei Vaišvila A. Teisės teorija – Vilnius, Kiti šaltiniai. 22 . Teisės teorija: vadovėlis by A Vaišvila(Book) 4 editions published between and in Lithuanian and held by 5 WorldCat member libraries worldwide.
As we see, only the logical method is not a traditional method of the ECJ problems with the distinguishing of this method are discussed in Part 5 of this article. See the Civil Code of Lithuania, Article 1. My position is that the differentiation of some methods of legal interpretation is logically inadequate and, therefore, extrinsic and misleading. Secondly, the differentiation of methods of legal interpretation should not be a differentiation of what amounts to the application of some general method of thinking in the court process the application of some general principle of the legal system or law in the court process: For now, in the following part, the latter aspect – how undemocratic the process may be – will be discussed more broadly.
It precisely reveals the secondary and even the third-tier role of the judicial branch in legislation. The approach to legal interpretation in Lithuania confronts two problems at the initial stage: In the more conventional Anglo-American view of stare decisis Just as no judge may even choose between logic and alogic, every lawyer must be taught logic, but not the logical method of legal interpretation.
Teises teorija : ketvirtasis leidimas
This article tries to answer the questions as to whether administrative or criminal liability should be applied to the legal entities for offences against the environment, and to which liability – criminal or administrative – a legislator should render priority in protecting the environment from illegal actions of the legal entities.
One of the measures which is able to ensure the implementation of sustainable development aims is the institute of legal entities’ environmental legal liability and its effective application.
How far can it go when interpreting legal rules adopted by the legislature? Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament. Now, when it has a chance to, it may turn in the least biased direction with its judicial branch. We know that cases are often dismissed on the absence of grounds or a legal norm to be applied. In the Brown and Kennedy book, right after the subsection, called Contextual interpretationwe find a subsection, called Comparative Law as Aid to Interpretationwhich begins with the sentence that ” [p]art of the context in which Community law operates is its interrelationship with the national laws of the member States” see note Antonin Scalia here is exactly the opposite: It should also be added that it does not matter very much that stare decisis is sometimes broken by the judiciary itself.
A platform for action. The related motive to that of the gap of law could be the legislative mistake. Legal entities violating the norms of environmental law set economic aim above social and environmental aims, hence legal entities also encroach on sustainable development and do not allow for a striving towards the combinability of environmental, economic and social societal aims.
There are signs of such processes in Lithuania and other Eastern European countries, where courts, especially constitutional ones, create broadly sweeping legal rules, as, for example, decisions abolishing the death penalty see note 6: The initial suggestions may be the following: Usually the proliferation was accompanied by a straightforward, even dogmatic, devaluation of the one understanding which had been prevalent in Soviet times.
Teisės teorija by Alfonsas Vaišvila
Actually, in the United States there are already cases where the court refuses to fill an alleged gap in the law, even when it amounts to an obvious error by Congress.
On the second aspect – allowing, using, applying, etc.
It is important to stress that this is a critical review. General conceptual problems relate to the differentiation and definition of legal interpretation as a phenomenon. It is not, however, easy to get rid of a dogmatic mode of thinking. And it appears that we do: Sometimes other concepts such as jurisprudence see note 9: First of all, as stated in Part 1, an ideology or a doctrine is questionable if it is based on quasi-oppositions proposed by the use of unexplained nonsubstantive adjectives or adverbs.
It looks like a democratic and, therefore, logically adequate start. On the dynamic legal interpretation see also Part 4 of this article.
The same with the interpretation and application of the law? What distinguishes the method of legal interpretation from other methods of interpretation and other modes of thought analysis, analogy, comparisonis how the meaning of law specifically is determined, amounting to a specific legal interpretation.
It is hard to understand how such antonymous concepts as separation and cooperation may mean in some way or other, each other; it is much more likely this is not simply a change of wording, but an essential change of meaning.
There are very few academic articles by Lithuanian authors that concentrate on the problems of legal interpretation. Simple theoretical proliferation of the understanding of legal interpretation has its problem at a more general level; that is the problem of the over-differentiation of the methods of legal interpretation.
What is important is what we look at when we compare or find analogies; that is, very generally, other law – constitutions, statutes, decrees, court decisions or even journal articles. The stereotype is that during the transformation one understanding was changed or, speaking more exactly, another understanding became the preferred understanding.
It is to improve the work of a democratic legislature, especially its linguistic input, as well as the linguistic input of all law-related processes.
The legal interpretation is a necessary step for the understanding of the exact meaning and purpose of a legal rule. Devaluation is more dangerous if it is done by means of propaganda and illogical argumentation. What does certainty as opposed to uncertainty mean? His unscientific approach is represented by repeating the allegation that a complex of methods should be applied, without any theoretical preference for one or another method see note 5: The other motive offered is gaps in the lawand it is very popular.
Doctrinal problems in Lithuania are related to the devaluation of the linguistic method of interpretation and, as a consequence, raising and propagating the doctrine of an active court to the detriment of the doctrine of the separation of powers. Legal interpretation is always the revelation or presumption of the real meaning of the legal norm.
In this respect, out of two Lithuanian authors, i.
The transformations involved many spheres of social life, including the law. To paraphrase Scalia, “[the] rule of law is about form. On the other hand, what is the difference between the determination of the true vaisvilw of the legal norm and saying why that true or “true” meaning is rational, sensible, well-founded?
Nevertheless, vaisvilaa a matter of principle, the priority should be of the doctrine of the separation of powers, and there we may also be more or less radical.
Privacy & Cookies Policy
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.