Search results
May 21, 2020 · But when it comes to the hard cases, it gets very difficult to decide with regard to its legal context, Dworkin defines hard cases as ‘no settled rule dictates a decision either way’. The judge’s intuitive judgement is very important and a hard case occurs when this intuitive judgement is unsettled.
Jul 28, 2020 · Hard Cases, 88 Harv. L. Rev. 1057 (1975) Timothy Brennan. Pages 378-381 | Published online: 28 Jul 2020. Cite this article. https://doi.org/10.1080/10811680.2020.1766894. Full Article. Figures & data. Citations. Metrics. Reprints & Permissions. Read this article. Click to increase image size. Notes. 1 See H. L. A. Hart, The Concept of Law (1961).
- Timothy Brennan
- 2020
People also ask
Who wrote hard cases 88 Harv L?
What is a good example of Ronald Dworkin?
What did Dworkin say about precedent?
How is a hard case decided?
Created Date: 10/1/2019 2:19:19 PM
- 6MB
- 52
Ronald Dworkin *. Philosophers and legal scholars have long debated the means by which decisions of an independent judiciary can be reconciled with democratic ideals. The problem of justifying judicial decisions is particularly acute in "hard cases," those cases in which the result.
From the book The Canon of American Legal Thought. Ronald Dworkin, “Hard Cases,” 88 Harvard Law Review 1057 (1975) was published in The Canon of American Legal Thought on page 549.
For the past four decades, Anglo-American legal philosophy has been preoccupied –. some might say obsessed – with something called the “Hart-Dworkin” debate. Since. the appearance in 1967 of “The Model of Rules I,” Ronald Dworkin’s seminal. critique of H. L. A. Hart’s theory of legal positivism, countless books and articles.
Ronald M. Dworkin, a legal philosopher of American origin, who holds the chair of jurisprudence at Oxford, has launched an attack on legal positivism (see his Taking Rights Seriously, London 1977). His attack is. powerful. He has located seemingly brittle components of positivism. with lucid reasoning.
