Advertisement

The Formula Approach for Indefinite Legal Concepts and the Possible Codification

  • Chang-fa LoEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter explains that there are “indefinite legal concepts” (such as “necessary” and “public interest”) which are intrinsically abstract and indefinite. Merely relying on finding the ordinary meaning of such terms might not be sufficient to understand their meanings and related application. There must be certain formulas developed for such terms to help their interpretation and application. This chapter uses some examples to show that the formula approach is desirable for such indefinite terms and is workable in real practice.

References

  1. Council of Europe. The Margin of Appreciation. https://www.coe.int/t/dghl/cooperateon/lisbonnetwork/themis/echr/paper2_en.asp. Accessed 21 Aug 2017
  2. Greer S (2000) The margin of appreciation: interpretation and discretion under the European Convention on Human Rights. Council of Europe Publishing, Strasbourg. http://www.echr.coe.int/LibraryDocs/DG2/HRFILES/DG2-EN-HRFILES-17(2000).pdf. Accessed 21 Aug 2017
  3. Grimm D (2007) Proportionality in Canadian and German Constitutional Jurisprudence. Univ Toronto Law J 57:383–397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Knill C (2001) The Europeanisation of national administrations: patterns of institutional change and persistence. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Maxeiner JR (2013) Scalia & Garner’s reading law: a civil law for the age of statutes? J Civil Law Stud 6:1–35Google Scholar
  6. Pakuscher EK (1976) The use of discretion in German Law. Univ Chicago Law Rev 44:94–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Singh MP (1985) German administrative law in common law perspective. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Judicial YuanConstitutional CourtTaipeiTaiwan

Personalised recommendations