L E G A L N O R M S
L e g a l L a n g u a g e
K a r o l i n a K o c e m b a
“ N o r m s o f c o n d u c t a r e l a n g u a g e u t t e r a n c e s [ . . . ] e x p r e s s e d i n t h e f o r m o f o r d e r o r p r o h i b i t
o f f u t u r e b e h a v i o r ”
A . B a t o r
General and individual Abstract and concrete
Ius cogens and ius dispositivum Rules and principles
Policies
S e v e r a l t y p e s o f n o r m s c a n b e d i s t i n g u i s h e d , a c c o r d i n g t o w h i c h t h e r e c i p i e n t c a n o b t a i n t h e i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t i t s c h a r a c t e r – f o r e x a m p l e t h e s c o p e o f r e g u l a t i o n , a d d r e s s e e s , l a t i t u d e e t c .
TYPES OF NORMS
INDIVIDUAL GENERAL
Norm's hypothesis is
formulated by individual name.
For example: John Smith, Sherlock Holmes etc.
These types of norms usually occur in administrative
decisions and judgements
addressee can be described e.g. using the criterion of profession (doctor), social role (mother), role in social relation (debtor- creditor) etc. The norm is general even if there exist only one person which may be characterized by such general qualities. For example, any norms specifying their
addressee as a Minister of Justice are regarded general
The division is based on the way of describing an addressee which can be indicated as a part of a group (distinguished by some general attributes) or as a particular entity
(distinguished using personal, unique features)
TYPES OF NORMS
ABSTRACT CONCRETE
The type of conduct is
described in a repeatable way, using non-contextual
designation.
Example: “Whoever is guilty of murder in the first degree shall be punished by death or by imprisonment for life”
The division is based on a manner of describing a legal obligation (prohibit, order, permission).
Criteria of norm’s applicability, and a prescribed conduct, are specified as a particular
situation.
Example: “O.J Simpson who is guilty of murder in the first degree shall be punished by imprisonment for life”.
Legal norms are always abstract and general. As a result of the law applying process they become concrete and individual.
TYPES OF NORMS
IUS COGENS IUS DISPOSITIVUM
You can call it: peremptory norm
It is a fundamental principle of international law that is accepted by the international community of states as a norm from which no derogation is permitted.
Prohibits addressees to modify its content - it must be strictly applied.
Relatively applied rules. Only if the legal relationship was not arranged otherwise ius
dispositivum is binding. It is characteristic of private law.
I U S C O G E N S
V i e n n a C o n v e n t i o n o n t h e L a w o f
T r e a t i e s
L o o k a t : a r t i c l e 5 3
P R O H I B I T I O N O F : g e n o c i d e ,
m a r i t i m e p i r a c y , s l a v i n g ,
t o r t u r e ,
r e f o u l e m e n t , a p a r t h e i d ,
w a r s o f a g g r e s s i o n ,
t e r r i t o r i a l a g g r a n d i z e m e n t
" A t r e a t y i s v o i d i f , a t t h e t i m e o f i t s c o n c l u s i o n , i t c o n f l i c t s w i t h a
p e r e m p t o r y n o r m o f g e n e r a l i n t e r n a t i o n a l l a w . F o r t h e p u r p o s e s
o f t h e p r e s e n t C o n v e n t i o n , a p e r e m p t o r y n o r m o f g e n e r a l i n t e r n a t i o n a l l a w i s a n o r m a c c e p t e d
a n d r e c o g n i z e d b y t h e i n t e r n a t i o n a l c o m m u n i t y o f s t a t e s a s a w h o l e a s a
n o r m f r o m w h i c h n o d e r o g a t i o n i s p e r m i t t e d a n d w h i c h c a n b e m o d i f i e d
o n l y b y a s u b s e q u e n t n o r m o f g e n e r a l i n t e r n a t i o n a l l a w h a v i n g t h e
s a m e c h a r a c t e r . "
e x a m p l e s
TYPES OF NORMS
RULES PRINCIPLES
are valid because they meet formal criteria (so called test of pedigree).
They have precise scope of application; therefore they are applied in ‘all or nothing’ mode. In the case of a collision between the rules, one of them is repealed and is not binding any more. Any
‘middle’ solution cannot be applied.
are valid because of the material significance. They are accepted and applied generally by lawyers. Their scope of application is imprecise; it depends on a wider context. For these reasons they need to be applied in a ‘more or less’
mode. Ergo, the principles may differ in importance (what holds true even for one principle, depending on the
particular case). The collision not necessarily leads to repealing one of the principles. Rather, a procedure of
‘weighing’ is employed in such a case: the significance of each principle for the particular case at hand is decided, but all of them remain binding
P O L I C I E S
P o l i c i e s a r e n o r m s e s t a b l i s h i n g t h e a i m w h i c h i s t o b e a c h i e v e d b y a d d r e s s e e s o f a p a r t i c u l a r l e g a l i n s t r u m e n t . U s u a l l y t h e y a p p e a r i n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l p r o v i s i o n s . I n a s e n s e , t h e y d e s c r i b e g e n e r a l a s p i r a t i o n s o f t h e l a w g i v e r , w i t h o u t g i v i n g m o r e p r e c i s e p r e s c r i p t i o n s a s f o r t h e w a y o f a c h i e v i n g t h e m . P o l i c i e s m a y b e e i t h e r q u i t e t e c h n i c a l a n d p r e c i s e , o r a x i o l o g i c a l a n d o p e n f o r v a r i o u s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s .
T h e s e c o n d t y p e i s t y p i c a l f o r c o n s t i t u t i o n a l r u l e s , e x a m p l e :
“ M a r r i a g e , b e i n g a u n i o n o f a m a n a n d a w o m a n , a s w e l l a s t h e f a m i l y , m o t h e r h o o d a n d p a r e n t h o o d , s h a l l b e p l a c e d u n d e r t h e p r o t e c t i o n a n d c a r e o f t h e R e p u b l i c o f P o l a n d ” ( T h e
C o n s t i t u t i o n o f t h e R e p u b l i c o f P o l a n d )
