The paper deals with the “application of the Constitutionˮ by ordinary courts. On the basis of literature review and preliminary Croatian case law research, six paradigmatic cases of the application ...of the Constitution by ordinary courts were selected (facts of the case directly regulated by constitutional rules, statutory gaps, avoidable in abstracto antinomies between constitutional and statutory norms, avoidable in concreto antinomies between constitutional and statutory norms, unconstitutionality of individual judicial and administrative decisions, and unavoidable in abstracto antinomies between constitutional and statutory norms). The cases selected were analyzed by using the method of argumentative analysis of judicial reasoning, within the framework of internal and external schemes of justification of judicial decisions, in examples (by and large) designed on the basis of Croatian case law.
U radu se utvrðuje u čemu se sastoji "primjena Ustava" od strane (hrvatskih) redovnih sudova. Na temelju pregleda relevantne literature i predistraživanja hrvatske sudske prakse, za potrebe ...istraživanja istaknuto je šest paradigmatskih slučajeva primjene Ustava od strane redovnih sudova (činjenice slučaja neposredno ureðene ustavnim pravilom, zakonska praznina, izbježiva antinomija in abstracto izmeðu ustavne i zakonske norme, izbježiva antinomija in concreto izmeðu ustavne i zakonske norme, neustavnost pojedinačne sudske i upravne odluke i neizbježna antinomija in abstracto izmeðu ustavne i zakonske norme). Istaknuti slučajevi analizirani su metodom argumentacijske analize sudačkog rasuðivanja u okviru shema unutarnjeg i vanjskog opravdanja sudske odluke u primjerima (uglavnom) osmišljenima na temelju konkretnih slučajeva iz hrvatske sudske prakse.
The paper discusses the explicitly stated understanding of legal science as it appears in compulsory course textbooks on positive law subjects at the Faculty of Law, University of Zagreb. The first ...part of the paper describes the research problem and posits the corresponding hypotheses, states the research aims, describes the method of qualitative content analysis, and elaborates on the content units used (themes, categories and subcategories). The second part establishes the textbooks which contain an explicit determination of a branch of legal science that they belong to, or legal science in general, and the extent to which they contain it. Furthermore, it establishes how the subject matter, objectives and methods of legal science are defined in the textbooks and whether the textbooks include interdisciplinarity as a part of legal research. The third part determines the predominant understanding of the subject matter, objectives and methods of legal science and the predominant understanding of interdisciplinarity of legal research in the analyzed course textbooks. The conclusion contains a discussion of research results, determines the extent to which the hypotheses are confirmed and highlights the possible avenues of further empirical and theoretical research on (Croatian) legal science. The research results demonstrate that the analyzed textbooks mostly contain at least an elementary determination of legal science, but differ greatly with respect to the placement, extent, and way of its elaboration. Furthermore, according to the predominant understanding, the subject matter of legal science are general legal norms. Its objectives are to describe the law, systematize it and to recommend more appropriate legislative solutions and ways of interpreting and applying it, while its methods are the dogmatic method, the comparative method, and the sociological method. Objectives and methods are mostly just mentioned, without being described and explained. Finally, less than a half of the textbooks mention that legal research includes some level of interdisciplinarity, while the predominant understanding is that interdisciplinarity consists primarily in using insights from other scientific disciplines.
U radu se raspravlja o izrijekom iskazanom shvaćanju pravne znanosti u obveznoj udžbeničkoj literaturi iz pozitivnopravnih predmeta na Pravnom fakultetu Sveučilišta u Zagrebu. U prvome se dijelu rada ...opisuje istraživački problem i postavljaju odgovarajuće hipoteze, navode ciljevi istraživanja, detaljno opisuje korištena metoda kvalitativne analize sadržaja teksta i razraðuju jedinice sadržaja (teme, kategorije i potkategorije). U drugome se dijelu rada utvrðuje koji udžbenici sadržavaju odredbu pravnoznanstvene discipline kojoj pripadaju i/ili pravne znanosti općenito, u kojoj je mjeri sadržavaju, kako odreðuju predmet, ciljeve i metode pravne znanosti i uključuju li interdisciplinarnost u pravnoznanstvena istraživanja. U trećem se dijelu rada utvrðuje prevladavajuće shvaćanje predmeta, ciljeva i metoda pozitivnopravne znanosti i prevladavajuće shvaćanje o interdisciplinarnosti pravnoznanstvenih istraživanja u analiziranoj udžbeničkoj literaturi. U zaključku se raspravlja o rezultatima istraživanja, utvrðuje u kojoj su mjeri hipoteze potvrðene te se upućuje na moguće dodatne smjerove teorijskih i empirijskih istraživanja (hrvatske) pravne znanosti. Rezultati istraživanja pokazuju da analizirani udžbenici uglavnom sadržavaju barem osnovnu odredbu pravne znanosti, no da se uvelike razlikuju s obzirom na mjesto, obuhvat i način njezine razradbe. Nadalje, prema prevladavajućem shvaćanju, predmet pravne znanosti su opće pravne norme, njezini ciljevi opis i usustavljenje prava te preporučivanje primjerenijih zakonodavnih rješenja i primjerenijeg tumačenja i primjene prava, a metode dogmatska, poredbena i sociološka metoda. Ciljevi i metode pravne znanosti u pravilu se samo navode, bez dodatnog opisa i objašnjenja. Konačno, u manje od polovice udžbenikâ navodi se da pravnoznanstvena istraživanja uključuju neki oblik interdisciplinarnosti, pri čemu je prevladavajuće shvaćanje da se interdisciplinarnost ponajprije sastoji u korištenju spoznajama drugih znanstvenih disciplina.
This thesis deals with Hans Kelsen’s concept of peripheral imputation, a relation established by law between material facts as legal conditions and consequences. Being a fundamental concept of his ...idea of legal science, this paper describes how Kelsen draws the comparison between imputation and causation, a fundamental principle of natural science that also connects material facts, albeit differently. In addition to the comparison itself, the paper discusses how Kelsen uses it to work in favor of legal science. Firstly, the difference between the two relations is used by Kelsen to justify the autonomy of legal science. After all, if it makes sense to talk about a way of relating things in the world that’s not causation, it makes sense to have a science that describes things as they’re related in this other way. Secondly, pointing to the analogies between the two relations, and consequently between legal and natural science, is supposed to prop up the legitimacy of former. For Kelsen, causal relations take the form of statements of scientific laws, so exploring this second move requires us to answer what makes scientific laws important in scientific explanation and whether this can be mimicked by imputation. The answer if far from obvious, but it’s tentatively proposed that Kelsen could make use of the idea of nomic necessity of scientific laws, as Kelsen has no trouble describing both relations as necessary in his early works. As this changes in his later works, the question arises whether Kelsen’s whole manoeuvre falls apart.
Full text
Available for:
IZUM, KILJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, UL, UM, UPUK
