Continuity in the Development of Judicial Law
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.6000/1929-4409.2020.09.122Keywords:
Continuity, judicial law, legal system, legal family, judicial practice, judicial precedent.Abstract
The ongoing changes in the legal map of the world reflect the interaction of legal systems. These processes inevitably affect the scope of activities of the judicial authorities associated with such a phenomenon as judicial law. The authors of the article take a narrow approach to understanding it. It implies the manifestation of judicial law as judicial practice and judicial precedents. The relevance of the topic is due to the fact that the phenomenon of judicial law goes beyond the limits of a single legal family, which implies its comparative legal research. At the same time, an important direction of such activity is the study of the development of this law associated with the processes of continuity. The objective of the study is to identify the concept and features of continuity in the development of judicial law. To do this, the authors formulated the following tasks: identify the concept and signs of continuity within the framework of legal development; disclose the peculiarities of understanding judicial law; determine the characteristic features of continuity in the development of judicial precedents; characterize continuity in the evolution of judicial practice. The conducted research is based on a dialectically understood model of continuity. This assumes the use of a systemic paradigm associated with a constellation of different methods, such as comparative, structural-functional, etc. The results allowed the authors to determine the trends and prospects for the development of judicial law within the framework of certain legal spaces. The authors of the article believe it advisable to use these results in subsequent research on this topic.
References
Bell, J. (2018). Sources of Law, The Cambridge Law Journal, 77(1), pp. 40-71. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0008197318000053 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0008197318000053
Burgess, P. (2016). “[The Rule of Law]” in the US Supreme Court: the Elephant in the Court Room? // Hague J Rule Law, 8, pp. 421–428. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40803-016-0030-1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40803-016-0030-1
Chestnov I.L. (2011). Succession of law in the context of postclassical science // Legal technology. Vol. 5 P.527-533
Enns, P. K., & Wohlfarth, P. C. (2013). The swing justice. The Journal of Politics, 75(4), 1089-1107. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022381613001035 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022381613001035
Gidron, N., & Kaplan, Y. (2017). Institutional Gardening: The Supreme Court in Economic Liberalization. Lewis & Clark L. Rev., 21, 685.
Gubaydullin A.R., Kurnosova V.V. (2019). Certain Forms of Expression of Judicial Precedent, REVISTA GENERO & DIREITO, Vol.8, Is.7, pp. 133-141. https://doi.org/10.22478/ufpb.2179-7137.2019v8n7.49950 DOI: https://doi.org/10.22478/ufpb.2179-7137.2019v8n7.49950
Hunter, R., Rackley, E. (2018). Judicial leadership on the UK Supreme Court // Legal Studies, 38(2), pp. 191-220. https://doi.org/10.1017/lst.2017.19 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/lst.2017.19
Johnson, T. R., Wahlbeck, P. J., & Spriggs, J. F. (2006). The influence of oral arguments on the US Supreme Court. American Political Science Review, 99-113. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055406062034 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055406062034
Kiminchizhi E.N., (2008) Questions of the subject of the science of judicial law, Russian judge. No. 9, p. 58.
Lemley, M. A., & Casey, B. (2019). Remedies for Robots. The University of Chicago Law Review, 86(5), 1311-1396.
Masood, A. S., Kassow, B. J. and Songer, D. R. (2017). Supreme Court Precedent in a Judicial Hierarchy // American Politics Research, 45(3), pp. 403–434. https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X16684572 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X16684572
Rybakov V.A. (2009), Continuity in domestic law: during transition: general theoretical questions: author’s abstract, Ph.D. Law. Omsk, 37 p.
Sullivan, B., & Canty, M. (2015). Interruptions in Search of a Purpose: Oral Argument in the Supreme Court, October Terms 1958-60 and 2010-12. Utah L. Rev., 1005. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2710839 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2710839
Terekhin V.A. (2010). Modernization of the judicial system and courts as a priority direction of judicial policy // Russian Justice. No. 5, P.39.
Williams, R. F. (1983). Statutory Law in Legal Education: Still Second Class After All These Years. Mercer L. Rev., 35, 803.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Policy for Journals/Articles with Open Access
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post links to their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work
Policy for Journals / Manuscript with Paid Access
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Publisher retain copyright .
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post links to their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work .
