By Jeremy Horder
The fourth choice of essays during this original sequence brings jointly the various prime members to the learn of the philosophical foundations of universal legislation. Key concerns in agreement, tort, and legal legislations are subjected to philosophical scrutiny, the purpose being to supply an exhilarating new foundation for complicated instructing and additional research.
Read Online or Download Oxford Essays in Jurisprudence: Fourth Series PDF
Similar legal theory & systems books
BOOKS IN SPANISH
Social paintings and the Courts is a compendium of the latest and significant criminal instances in social paintings and social welfare. Its dissection and research of the most important circumstances makes it an exceptional instrument for educating social staff to appreciate the felony procedure and its operation. The publication demonstrates how courts view and care for the functionality, motion, and behavior of social staff and their organizations.
Estate legislation and Social Morality develops a concept of estate that highlights the social development of duties that people owe one another. via viewing estate legislation throughout the lens of duties instead of throughout the lens of rights, the writer affirms the life of significant estate rights (when no legal responsibility to a different exists) and defines the scope of these rights (when a duty to a different does exist).
- 25 Doctrines of Law You Should Know
- Philosophical Foundations of the Law of Unjust Enrichment
- The Judicial Process: Realism, Pragmatism, Practical Reasoning and Principles
- The Four Lacanian Discourses: or Turning Law Inside Out
Extra resources for Oxford Essays in Jurisprudence: Fourth Series
In Routledge Encyclopedia of Narrative Theory, edited by D. Herman, M. Jahn, and M. Ryan, Routledge. PART ONE Analyzing Legal Translations on the Ground 2 Translating Defendants’ Apologies during Allocution at Sentencing M. 1 In this paper, Gruber uses sociolinguistic analysis to explore communication problems that arise in courtroom exchanges between defendants and judges. Specifically, she examines the different possible meanings of apologies made to the court by convicted defendants during their sentencing hearings.
What we are calling disciplinary “languages” here would generally be referred to as registers within fields such as sociolinguistics and linguistic anthropology. , meta-level, culturally informed ideas about how language works)—and one that can actively hinder understanding. If we think of the differences in forms of disciplines’ communication as differences in “languages” that need “translation,” we may take more seriously the divisions that lead to failures in interdisciplinary understandings.
Allocution also comes with risks, however. As noted by O’Hear (1997) and Natapoff (2005), one of the main risks for defendants—especially those who have pleaded guilty (and this is the vast majority2)—is that the defendant might speak in such a way as to suggest that she/he had not fully accepted responsibility for the crime. At federal sentencing hearings, judges generally impose sentences based on the Federal Sentencing Guidelines. Defendants get assigned a particular range of months of incarceration based on the intersection of their total offense level and their criminal history category.