澳洲新南威尔士代写:法律权利

Keywords:澳洲新南威尔士代写:法律权利

根据实用主义理论，法律权利和责任的分配必须与过去的决定相一致。此外，实用主义理论认为判决并不受法律的约束。因此，实用主义认为，法官“应该决定，在他们看来，什么样的决定对整个社会最有利”。这意味着，出于战略考虑，法官有时必须表现得“好像”他们在申请既存的法律权利。与此同时，根据实用主义理论，在某种程度上，法院在作出某一案件的判决时的行为不受现有法律的约束。这两种法律理论受到德沃金的高度批判。正如德沃金所指出的那样，“假设法官有时会发明法律，这意味着他们的行为不受约束。”实用主义还假定法官在审理案件时几乎不受约束。因此，它无法解释为什么法官在裁决艰难案件时如此关注判例和法规。德沃金随后提出了第三个法律理论，他认为这不仅更好地代表了法官审理案件时实际发生的事情，而且也是一个道德上更好的法律理论。
澳洲新南威尔士代写:法律权利
According to the theory of pragmatism, assignments of legal rights and responsibilities must be consistent with past decisions. Moreover, the pragmatist theory holds the view that adjudication is not really constrained by the law. Hence, pragmatism argues that judges “should decide what decision will, according to them, be best for the community as a whole.” [3] This means that for reasons of strategy judges must sometimes act “as if” they are applying pre-existing legal rights. [4] In the meanwhile, in accordance with pragmatist theory, to some extent, the behaviour of a court in making decision of certain case is not constrained by the existing law.These two legal theories are highly criticized by Dworkin. As Dworkin points out that “assumes that judges sometimes invent law, which means that they act in an unconstrained manner. Pragmatism also assumes that judges are hardly constrained when adjudicating cases. It thus cannot account for why judges are so concerned with precedents and statutes when they decide hard cases.”Dworkin then provides a third theory of law, which he believes not only better represents what actually happens when judges decide cases but is also a morally better theory of law.