Justified epistemic authority (in legal interpretation)

The paper analyzes one of the main influences on the results of legal interpretation - epistemic authority. An account of authority is given along with a distinction between two basic types of authority, followed by a brief explanation of practical authority. Epistemic authority and derivative epist...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Spaić Bojan
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: University of Belgrade, Faculty of Law, Belgrade, Serbia 2018-01-01
Series:Anali Pravnog Fakulteta u Beogradu
Subjects:
Online Access:https://scindeks-clanci.ceon.rs/data/pdf/0003-2565/2018/0003-25651804143S.pdf
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849693725540745216
author Spaić Bojan
author_facet Spaić Bojan
author_sort Spaić Bojan
collection DOAJ
description The paper analyzes one of the main influences on the results of legal interpretation - epistemic authority. An account of authority is given along with a distinction between two basic types of authority, followed by a brief explanation of practical authority. Epistemic authority and derivative epistemic authority in particular are explained, in order to propose the conditions under which the influence of epistemic authority on judicial interpretation is justified. The general conclusion of the paper is the following: A court or judge Y is rationally justified to defer to the ascription of meaning (interpretation) p to a legal text q of person X, if court or judge Y has good reasons to believe that X has more knowledge, skills, experience or training in ascribing meaning to (interpreting) q.
format Article
id doaj-art-568a39f1c4544d2f89cb6bcfa279237c
institution DOAJ
issn 0003-2565
2406-2693
language English
publishDate 2018-01-01
publisher University of Belgrade, Faculty of Law, Belgrade, Serbia
record_format Article
series Anali Pravnog Fakulteta u Beogradu
spelling doaj-art-568a39f1c4544d2f89cb6bcfa279237c2025-08-20T03:20:19ZengUniversity of Belgrade, Faculty of Law, Belgrade, SerbiaAnali Pravnog Fakulteta u Beogradu0003-25652406-26932018-01-0166414315510.5937/AnaliPFB1804143S0003-25651804143SJustified epistemic authority (in legal interpretation)Spaić Bojan0https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8887-9683University of Belgrade, Faculty of Law, SerbiaThe paper analyzes one of the main influences on the results of legal interpretation - epistemic authority. An account of authority is given along with a distinction between two basic types of authority, followed by a brief explanation of practical authority. Epistemic authority and derivative epistemic authority in particular are explained, in order to propose the conditions under which the influence of epistemic authority on judicial interpretation is justified. The general conclusion of the paper is the following: A court or judge Y is rationally justified to defer to the ascription of meaning (interpretation) p to a legal text q of person X, if court or judge Y has good reasons to believe that X has more knowledge, skills, experience or training in ascribing meaning to (interpreting) q.https://scindeks-clanci.ceon.rs/data/pdf/0003-2565/2018/0003-25651804143S.pdfauthoritylegal interpretationepistemic authoritypractical authority
spellingShingle Spaić Bojan
Justified epistemic authority (in legal interpretation)
Anali Pravnog Fakulteta u Beogradu
authority
legal interpretation
epistemic authority
practical authority
title Justified epistemic authority (in legal interpretation)
title_full Justified epistemic authority (in legal interpretation)
title_fullStr Justified epistemic authority (in legal interpretation)
title_full_unstemmed Justified epistemic authority (in legal interpretation)
title_short Justified epistemic authority (in legal interpretation)
title_sort justified epistemic authority in legal interpretation
topic authority
legal interpretation
epistemic authority
practical authority
url https://scindeks-clanci.ceon.rs/data/pdf/0003-2565/2018/0003-25651804143S.pdf
work_keys_str_mv AT spaicbojan justifiedepistemicauthorityinlegalinterpretation