Wachtwoord vergeten | Code activeren

Beschrijving
Voorwoord

Inhoudsopgave

	Legal Argumentation and the Rule of Law
	Judicial Discretion and the Rule of Law
	The Rule of Dual-Natured Law
	Prototypical Argumentative Patterns in the Justification of Judicial Decisions
	The Legal Characterization of Facts at the International Criminal Court
	The Facebook Judge? How Transparency in Social Media Conflicts with the Rule of Law
	Analogy and E Contrario: The Facts
	The Burden of Rationality: Why and How Should the Judge Justify Her Decision?
	Four Fallacies about Analogical Reasoning and the Rule of Law
	Improving Judicial Argumentation about Evidence in Dutch Unus Testis Cases
	Legal Argumentation between ‘Monologue’ and ‘Dialogue’
	Fundamental Rights and the Rule of Law
	Arguing for Certainty in Criminal Decision-Making and the Rule of Law
	Legislative Argumentation and the Rule of Law
	Argumentative Contributions to the Settlement of Conflicts in Administrative Judicial Decisions
	Due Process and the Rule of Law: The Role of Argumentation in the Defence of a Fair Trial
	Rule of Law and Legal Epistemology
	Rhetorical Status Theory as an Institutional Framework for Legal Discussions
	Debiasing and Rule of Law
Afbeeldingen

Beschrijving

Modern legal systems are characterized by a tension between two commonplaces: the Rule of Law on the one hand, and the arguable character of law on the other. The Rule of Law calls for legal certainty, predictability and reasonableness; the argumentative character of law implies room for rational disagreement. In this book, expert scholars come together to offer interdisciplinary approaches to debate this tension and its possible reconciliation. Central in their perspective is that reconciliation is possible when the Rule of Law also incorporates rules for reason-giving. Reason-giving should be part of a substantive conception of the Rule of Law. Requiring that legal decision-makers give reasons furthers reasonable outcomes. The analysis of the ideal of rational argumentation and the ideal of the Rule of Law show how insights of two traditions are connected.

This collection of essays includes contributions from law, argumentation theory, logic and philosophical perspectives. This multifaceted approach demonstrates the variety of questions that emerge at the intersection of both commonplaces. This volume fills a remarkable void in the current literature on the Rule of Law. It should be welcomed, not only by experts in Legal Methodology, Argumentation Theory and Rhetoric, but by judges, lawyers and law students as well.                                                                                                                            

Auteursinformatie

Eveline Feteris, Department of Speech Communication, Argumentation Theory and Rhetoric, University of Amsterdam.

Harm Kloosterhuis, Erasmus School of Law, Erasmus University College, Erasmus University Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

Jose Plug, Department of Speech Communication, Argumentation, Theory and Rhetoric, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 

Carel Smith, E.M. Meijers Institute of Legal Studies, Leiden University, The Netherlands.

Bestellen

Als u meer over dit boek wilt weten, of het boek wilt bestellen, ga dan naar onze website.