| 用原则断案时的论证义务——以“里格斯诉帕尔默案”为例 |
| |
| 引用本文： | 张卓明.用原则断案时的论证义务——以“里格斯诉帕尔默案”为例[J].常熟理工学院学报,2008,22(1):48-51. |
| |
| 作者姓名： | 张卓明 |
| |
| 作者单位： | 中国社会科学院,法学研究所,北京,100720 |
| |
| 摘 要： | 在某种意义上，法律原则是作为形式正义与实质正义之间的调节器出现在司法裁判中的。用原则断案时，有着较为严格的论证要求，这是因为原则相对于规则的刚性，具有柔性的特征，在适用原则时会带有较多的价值判断和自由裁量：较之于“泸州遗赠案”，“里格斯诉帕尔默案”的成功之处很大程度上在于其充分的论证。
|
| 关 键 词： | 法律原则 法律解释 论证义务 |
| 文章编号： | 1008-2794(2008)01-0048-03 |
| 修稿时间： | 2007年11月23 |
The Obligation of Argumentation When Decided by Principles:A Case Study of Riggs v. Palmer |
| |
| ZHANG Zhuo-ming.The Obligation of Argumentation When Decided by Principles:A Case Study of Riggs v. Palmer[J].Journal of Changshu Institute of Technology,2008,22(1):48-51. |
| |
| Authors: | ZHANG Zhuo-ming |
| |
| Institution: | ZHANG Zhuo-ming ( Institute of Law, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, Beijing 100720, China) |
| |
| Abstract: | In a sense,legal principles appear in judicial decision as a coordinator between formal justice and substantive justice.When a case is decided by principles,stricter argumentation is demanded.This is because principles are flexible norms while rules are rigid norms,and as a result,when principles are applied there will be much more value judgments and discretions.In contrast to the Luzhou Legacy Case,the success of Riggs v.Palmer depends heavenly on its enough argumentation. |
| |
| Keywords: | (legal) principles legal interpretations obligation of argumentation |
| 本文献已被 CNKI 维普 万方数据 等数据库收录！ |
