IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hig/wpaper/21-law-2013.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The normativity of legal rules according to Eugen Ehrlich

Author

Listed:
  • Mikhail Antonov

    (National Research University Higher School of Economics (St. Petersburg))

Abstract

In this paper the author questions the role of Eugen Ehrlich's sociological jurisprudence for contemporary debates regarding the sources of binding rules that have their (ontological) foundation in societal practices, but whose validity cannot be extracted from these practices. The question on the normativity of legal rules for Ehrlich was not identical with the thesis on the normativity of social practices and the patterns of behavior that are capable of having a biding force if fixed in a legally recognized form (i.e., recognized by the legal community). As a result, the process of norm-creation requires an intellectual reconstruction of these practices and patterns by jurists, judges, and legislators who reshape societal relations into legal ones with the help of particular intellectual images. It is this reshaping that gives rise to legal rules. The process of such reconstruction cannot be anything but intellectual, and therefore cannot be conceived of without reference to the creative work of lawyers. Consequently, legal rules cannot emerge directly from societal practices. The practices in which the lawyers are engaged or which they simply contemplate, can influence their creative activity, but cannot replace it, and thus cannot provide a mechanical transformation of the factual into the intellectual or normative

Suggested Citation

  • Mikhail Antonov, 2013. "The normativity of legal rules according to Eugen Ehrlich," HSE Working papers WP BRP 21/LAW/2013, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:hig:wpaper:21/law/2013
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.hse.ru/data/2013/07/03/1286243561/21LAW2013.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    sociology of law; living law; official law; normativity; binding force of law;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • K1 - Law and Economics - - Basic Areas of Law

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hig:wpaper:21/law/2013. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Shamil Abdulaev or Shamil Abdulaev (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/hsecoru.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.