StudentShare
Contact Us
Sign In / Sign Up for FREE
Search
Go to advanced search...
Free

Judges as Lawmakers: Harts Rule of Recognition - Essay Example

Cite this document
Summary
This essay "Judges as Lawmakers: Hart’s Rule of Recognition" analyzes Hart’s rule of recognition which allows flexibility of judicial interpretation within the framework of social rules.  …
Download full paper File format: .doc, available for editing
GRAB THE BEST PAPER94.6% of users find it useful
Judges as Lawmakers: Harts Rule of Recognition
Read Text Preview

Extract of sample "Judges as Lawmakers: Harts Rule of Recognition"

Judges as lawmakers: Hart’s Rule of recognition Introduction: John Austin was of the view that “a law may be defined as a rule laid down for the guidance of an intelligent being by an intelligent being having power over him.”1 Austin drew support from views advocated by Bentham who defines law as the signs that indicate the “volition conceived or adopted by the sovereign in a state”2 who conditions obedience and morality through the tools of “pain and pleasure … words which a man has no need… to go to a Lawyer to know the meaning of.”3 Austin supports Bentham’s views in that every legal norm needs to constitute a threat that is backed up by a sanction; therefore coercion is an essential feature of the law. Kelsen is of the view that the ability of the law to use the threat of violence where necessary and impose its rules through its coercive nature is its most important aspect4. Therefore, under such a coercive framework, the scope for judicial interpretation may be seen to be limited, posing the question of whether true justice may be served through rigid adherence to rules laid down by the sovereign and through social norms. Hart fiercely opposes the predictive interpretation of law based upon its coercive aspect on the grounds that such interpretation “obscures the fact that, where rules exist, deviations from them are not merely grounds for prediction that hostile reactions will follow.... but are also a reason or justification for such reaction and for applying the sanctions.”5 Judicial flexibility in Hart’s Rule of recognition: Raz emphasizes the social learning aspect of conforming to rules, applying a test of behavioral guidance to determine that a person could have come to accept the rules without actually deciding to do so, or questioning the original justification for the rule itself.6 According to Hart, a full blown system of law must be equipped with more than mere rules, since these are only “concerned with the actions that individuals must or must not do”, while secondary meta rules that have the primary rules as their subject matter help to “specify the way in which the primary rules may be conclusively ascertained, introduced, eliminated, varied, and the fact of their violation conclusively determined.”7 Thus, while primary rules spell out the obligations of the individual, secondary rules help courts to resolve disputes over the application and interpretation of those primary rules and may therefore be classified as rules of recognition. However, the important aspect that distinguishes Hart’s approach from natural law and morality as put forth by Bentham and Austin is the fact that the law and morality are viewed as strictly separate. According to Klaus F, the definition of law must be completely free from moral notions8, while Hart questions whether law should be conceptualized as coercive mandates and moral commands and concludes that there may be no moral justification mandated through legal rights and duties9. But he does not completely dismiss the moral aspect, he admits that in certain cases, a determination of the validity of a legal rule may involve its compatibility with moral values.10 For example, in the case of Riggs v Palmer11 a defendant who killed his father due to the fear that he might change his will and disinherit him, was considered to have committed an immoral act that could not be condoned although from a legal perspective, the defendant had every right to inherit the property. Dworkin states that the Court decided this case on the basis of “the principle that no man may profit from his own wrong as a background standard against which to read the statute of wills.”12 In effect, such judicial interpretation impacts upon existing law. In the case of Riggs the judges have performed a function of not merely applying the law, but indicating change in the law to support justice. Similarly, in the landmark case of Roe v Wade13, the existing law on a woman’s right to an abortion was changed and the factor impelling the decision of the judges in this context was the secondary rules that were the result of the social context governing the individual case. Another such case that may be cited is that of Hedley Byrne14 where the judges expanded the scope of contract law, circumventing the Doctrine of Privity of contract, to include and allow third party action under tort. Hart describes those laws that impose duties on individuals as the primary rules of obligation, where the function of judicial interpretation is limited. However, when the primary rules are not sufficiently clear or comprehensible, then there is likely to be uncertainty in determining duties and obligations under the law, which will necessitate the application of secondary meta rules that he characterizes as the rules of recognition. In some instances, where primary rules are inadequate to satisfy the requirements of the law, it may be necessary for judges to engage in creative judicial interpretation to ensure justice, which in some cases may also mandate the formulation of new laws. Hart’s Rule of recognition thus allows for judicial interpretation of the law which may even extend to the evolving of new statues where necessary. The application of the law to an individual case could form the precedent for a general rule of law that will be applied in the future, as has been the case with Roe and Hedley Byrne. As explained by Raz, “Many legal systems recognize that both rules and principles can be made into law or lose their status as law through precedent.”15 This is precisely the aspect that leads to the judicial law-making function, since existing laws can be over-ridden or new laws mooted through the precedent established by judicial decisions. Since there is room for interpretation in some cases like Riggs where the decision of the Court to eschew promulgated law and set a new precedent may be seen to be a function of its discretion in interpretation, this places judges more in the capacity of forces instigating changes in law. This is so even in a country like the UK where according to Dicey, the judicial role is to protect Parliamentary sovereignty from any encroachment by the executive and in doing so, fulfill the function that Parliament has assigned to judicial authorities.16 As Lord Browne Wilkinson has pointed out, British judges have already used their judicial power in several cases to protect what they consider as fundamental rights17 indicating their willingness to subject government initiatives impacting upon fundamental rights to “the most anxious scrutiny”18 Therefore, the significant impact of judicial decisions in cases such as Hedley are important in establishing the law-making role that is partly imbued upon judicial authorities. Judicial activity sometimes requires an application of principles that may extend beyond those strictly promulgated under the law and such binding principles are derived from their contributions in terms of providing the best moral justification for society’s legal practices and existing rules19. Dworkin however, rejects Hart’s concept of judicial discretion as being inclusive of the facility of formulating new laws20, but views it as being restricted to the determination of legal principles in accordance with the existing laws. Dworkin contests the rule of recognition and states that “if we treat principles as law we must reject the positivists first tenet, that the law of a community is distinguished from other social standards by some test in the form of a master rule.”21 He also rejects the social rules basis of Hart’s rule of recognition and states: “…two people whose rules differ ... cannot be appealing to the same social rule, and at least one of them cannot be appealing to any social rule at all"23 In pointing out the conflicts that arise in an application of social rules to an interpolation of national and international laws, Dworkin points out that Hart’s qualification about his rule of recognition being flexible at some points, in fact undermines his theory. “ If judges are in fact divided about what they must do if a subsequent Parliament tries to repeal an entrenched rule, then it is not uncertain whether any social rule [of recognition] governs that decision; on the contrary, it is certain that none does.24 Conclusion: On the basis of the above, it may be noted that Hart’s rule of recognition allows flexibility of judicial interpretation within the framework of social rules. While judicial function is strictly restricted to interpreting the existing law, judicial activism has in fact resulted in some instances where the precedents set by judicial authorities have become the law through continued application via established legal precedent. While in the UK, the law making function of the judiciary is not so pronounced, this may be seen to be a function of the lack of separation of powers between executive and judiciary through parliamentary sovereignty. However in countries such as the United States, precedents set by the Supreme Court have undoubtedly formed the body of future law and therefore the objections to the judicial latitude allowed within Hart’s Rule of recognition are justified. Bibliography * Austin, John, 1977. Lectures on jurisprudence and the philosophy of positive law. MI: Scholarly Press. * Bentham, Jeremy, 1782. Of Laws in general. HLA Hart edition, London: Athlone Press, 1970 * Dicey, A/.V. (1885) “Law of the Constitution” 10th edition, 1914. Oxford: Oxford University Press * Dworkin, Ronald, 1977. Taking Rights Seriously. Cambridge: Harvard University Press * Hart, H.L.A., 1994. The concept of law. 2nd edn. Oxford: Clarendon Press * Kelsen General theory of Law and State * Klaus, F Per, 1996. Farewell to legal Positivism: The separation thesis unraveling In George, Robert P. The autonomy of law: Essays on legal Positivism Oxford: Clarendon Press. * Raz, Joseph, 1972. Legal Principles and the limits of law 81, Yale Law Review, 823 * Raz, J, 1975. Practical reasons and Norms Princeton University Press Cases: * Hedley Byrne v Heller (1963) 2 All ER 575. * R v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Bugdaycay (1987)AC 514 * Riggs v Palmer (1889) 115 NY 506 * Roe v Wade Read More
Cite this document
  • APA
  • MLA
  • CHICAGO
(Judges as Lawmakers: Harts Rule of Recognition Essay, n.d.)
Judges as Lawmakers: Harts Rule of Recognition Essay. https://studentshare.org/law/1703649-2-is-it-a-telling-objection-to-harts-rule-of-recognition-that-it-places-legal-officials-in-the-position-of-conferring-the-status-of-lawmakers-upon-themselves
(Judges As Lawmakers: Harts Rule of Recognition Essay)
Judges As Lawmakers: Harts Rule of Recognition Essay. https://studentshare.org/law/1703649-2-is-it-a-telling-objection-to-harts-rule-of-recognition-that-it-places-legal-officials-in-the-position-of-conferring-the-status-of-lawmakers-upon-themselves.
“Judges As Lawmakers: Harts Rule of Recognition Essay”. https://studentshare.org/law/1703649-2-is-it-a-telling-objection-to-harts-rule-of-recognition-that-it-places-legal-officials-in-the-position-of-conferring-the-status-of-lawmakers-upon-themselves.
  • Cited: 0 times

CHECK THESE SAMPLES OF Judges as Lawmakers: Harts Rule of Recognition

Do Judges Make the Law or Find It

Do judges Make the Law or Find It?... Name of Institution Date Do judges Make the Law or Find It?... It is no doubt that judges have a very special place in the legal system of countries that apply common laws.... The internal legal culture of the common law countries focuses on the roles of judges.... hellip; While it is agreeable that judges have a special place in the legal system, there is a raging debate on their roles especially in regard to making laws....
9 Pages (2250 words) Essay

Disciplining judges

Disciplining judges Course/Number Date Introduction That every state in America has judicial uniqueness is a matter that is well underscored by states having their own jurisdiction, laws and legal procedures.... The issue of disciplining judges is not an exception when it comes to legal procedures that may vary from one state to another.... hellip; In the case of Michigan, the procedure of disciplining judges will have to be consistent with the Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct (MRPC) which was adopted and effected by the Michigan Supreme Court on October 1st, 1988....
3 Pages (750 words) Essay

The Significance that Moral Views in the Development of English Law

Moreover, within the context of English Law, this relationship is further emphasised in the role that judges play in the development of precedents embodied within case law.... As this essay will argue, moral views have played a significant role in the development of English laws, due to the consideration that the legal community has given to the collective standards of morality accepted by the English society in creating legislations, statutes, and EC (European Council) Directives; and the discretion of judges in developing precedents in common law....
11 Pages (2750 words) Essay

(Criminal Justice) Issues for Judges and Sentencing

The subjects of… The rules that are in the court do vary depending on the jurisdiction, but they possess several features that are common (Johnson, 2006). Ethical codes are used in most of the states and Issues for judges and Sentencing affiliation Issues for judges and Sentencing In all judicial proceedings, it is theJudge's sole responsibility to ensure that all parties receive hearing that if fair in a dignified forum.... judges are expected to be neutral, and their decisions should be impartial, knowledgeable and authoritative....
1 Pages (250 words) Assignment

Difference between Hard and Soft Earmarks

lawmakers are in a capacity to request for funds to be allocated to a certain organization or project without the legal binding presented by hard earmarks (Mikesell, 2014).... In my opinion, soft earmarks are more effective for lawmakers.... Notably, with soft earmarks, lawmakers do not need to specify the amount of money and do not need to identify the sponsor.... Hard earmarks are highly criticized and compel lawmakers to account for the spending (p....
2 Pages (500 words) Essay

Impact of New Media on Conduct of Judges and Juries

This paper “Impact of New Media on Conduct of judges and Juries” will look at the impact of new media on the conduct of judges and juries in relation to a public lecture by the Chief justice of the Victorian Supreme Court, Marilyn Warren, on Open justice in the technological age....
13 Pages (3250 words) Dissertation

Judges Make Law and Legal System of the United Kingdom

hellip; The lawmakers passed the legislation.... This work called "judges Make Law" describes the judge's power to make law indicates that the law-making power is not unbridled.... The author outlines that the judges while making the decision should take into account the existing laws, precedents, and statutory requirements....   There are mixed opinions about the legal system of the United Kingdom with regard to the power of judges to make law and reject it....
8 Pages (2000 words) Essay

Judges Rule on the Basis of Law

nbsp;… The fundamental role of a judge is to preserve an independent judiciary, by applying both the rule of law and the fair application of the law to all, regardless of the religious, social, political, or the economic status and affiliation of the accused (Hasday, 2000:27).... This work called "Judges Rule on the Basis of Law" focuses on the recognition of the role of a judge.... At this point, it might be important to pose and reflect on this fundamental question; if Judges rule on the basis of law, not public opinion, and they should be totally indifferent to pressures of the times, why then are there numerous circumstances where a judgment delivered by one court is overturned by the other, while both courts have access to the same law, and derive their contradictory rulings from that same law?...
8 Pages (2000 words) Essay
sponsored ads
We use cookies to create the best experience for you. Keep on browsing if you are OK with that, or find out how to manage cookies.
Contact Us