|
Library
|
Your profile |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.|
LEX RUSSICA (Russian Law)
Reference:
Dong Yuting
Correspondence between the thinking of
lawyers and judicial justice concept
// LEX RUSSICA (Russian Law).
2014. ¹ 1.
P. 17-23.
URL: https://en.nbpublish.com/library_read_article.php?id=63782
Dong Yuting Correspondence between the thinking of lawyers and judicial justice conceptAbstract: Judicial justice is justice in its legal sense and justice within the system of proof. In order to implement it there is need for the legal practitioners to have legal thinking. Without due legal thinking it is hard to establish the true meaning of a legal norm. Legal thinking has two levels: firstly, the conceptual difference between legal thinking and common thinking in its methodological principles; secondly, the lawyers should have de facto legal skills of use of laws at the practical level. Implementation of judicial justice is a great social task. Cognition of patterns of legal thinking, formation of skills of such a type of thinking are necessary for its implementation. The ethical imperfections of legal practitioners causes the legal thinking skills to preclude implementation of judicial justice instead of facilitating it. Formation of legal thinking is just the first stage of implementation of judicial justice. At the same time, legal thinking should not be too far divided from the social need for justice, on the opposite, it should correspond to this need. Keywords: jurisprudence, true meaning of a norm, justice, social need, conflict of justice, common thinking, legal thinking, proof, lawyer, judicial justice.
This article can be downloaded freely in PDF format for reading. Download article
This article written in Russian. You can find original text of the article here . References
1. Mark Warren Bailey, Early Legal Education in the United States: Natural Law Theory and Law as a Moral Science // Journal of Legal Education, Vol. 48, No. 3 (September 1998).
2. Martin Stone, Focusing Law: What Legal Interpretation Is Not? In Andrei Marmor, ed., Law and Interpretation: Essays in Legal Philosophy, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995. 3. Van Limin. Issledovanie sudebnoy reformy. – Pekin: Yurid. izd-vo, 2011. 4. Gun Peysyan, Lyu Min'. O tsennostnom soderzhanii sudebnoy spravedlivosti i ee institu-tsional'nom obespechenii // Voprosy kommercheskogo prava. – 1999. – ¹ 5. 5. Sun' Syaosya. Navyki i etika yuristov // Pravovye issledovaniya. – 2001. – ¹4. 6. Khe Tszyakhun. Sudebnaya spravedlivost' // Kitayskoe pravo. – 1999. – ¹ 2. 7. Tsyan Shigun. Deklaratsiya yuridicheskogo soobshchestva // Kitayskoe i zarubezhnoe pravove-denie. – 2001. – ¹ 3. 8. Tsi Veydun. Mesto yuridicheskoy professii – praktika preobrazovaniya struktury vla-sti v Yaponii // Kitayskie obshchestvennye nauki. – 1994. – ¹ 2. 9. Chzhou Guanzhen'. Rol' opredelennykh i neopredelennykh terminov v yuridicheskikh suzhde-niyakh // Politiko-pravovoy forum. – 1998. – ¹ 6. 10. Chzhen Chenlyan. Spravedlivost' v zakone. – Pekin: Yurid. izd-vo, 2002. 11. Yao Li. Analiz elementov sudebnoy spravedlivosti // Pravovye issledovaniya. – 2003. – ¹ 5 |
© 1998 – 2024 Nota Bene. Publishing Technologies. NB-Media Ltd.
Eng
