Abstract
While not all legal scholarship fits in a so-called legal paradigm, a specific approach to discretion is still occasionally attributed to legal scholarship as such. Particularly some socio-legal scholars are inclined to contrast it with their own approach to the study of discretion. After setting out the main characteristics of the legal paradigm, the chapter continues by illustrating that a socio-legal approach of discretion indeed complements the legal paradigm by rendering visible the variable ways in which discretion is used in practice which research that fits in the legal paradigm cannot. The illustration is based on a case study of judges’ use of sentencing discretion in lower courts. Subsequently, it is argued that contrasting the legal paradigm with a socio-legal approach may come at a cost. Differences between a legal and a socio-legal approach to the study of discretion may be overstated while commonalities may be missed.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
