Since its first appearance in 1979, this work has established itself as a classic of legal philosophy. This study focuses on current jurisprudential debate between the "positivist" views of Herbert Hart and the "rights thesis" of Ronald Dworkin. MacCormick provides a critical analysis of the Dworkin position while also modifying Hart's. It stands firmly on its own as a contribution to an extensive literature. Now available in paperback, and with a new foreword by the author, this popular book will continue to be of use to students and teachers of law, legal theory, and philosophy.
Since its first appearance in 1979, this work has established itself as a classic of legal philosophy. This study focuses on current jurisprudential d...
Institutions of Law offers an original account of the nature of law and legal systems in the contemporary world. It provides the definitive statement of Sir Neil MacCormick's well-known 'institutional theory of law', defining law as 'institutional normative order' and explaining each of these three terms in depth. It attempts to fulfill the need for a twenty-first century introduction to legal theory marking a fresh start such as was achieved in the last century by H. L. A. Hart's The Concept of Law. Institutions of Law is written with a view to elucidating law, legal concepts and legal...
Institutions of Law offers an original account of the nature of law and legal systems in the contemporary world. It provides the definitive statement ...
When cases come before courts can we predict the outcome? Is legal reasoning rationally persuasive, working within a formal structure and using recognizable forms of arguments to produce predictable results? Or is legal reasoning mere "rhetoric" in the pejorative sense, open to use, and abuse, to achieve whatever ends unscrupulous politicians, lawyers and judges desire? If the latter what becomes of the supposed security of living under the rule of law? This book tackles these questions by presenting a theory of legal reasoning, developing the author's classic account given in Legal...
When cases come before courts can we predict the outcome? Is legal reasoning rationally persuasive, working within a formal structure and using recogn...