Abstract
Legal positivism has been ascribed many vices. Among other perils its critics observe the mechanistic narrow-mindedness of positivism which often enables wicked regimes to abuse the authority and consistency arguments for committing atrocities in the name of law and order. This type of criticism is of direct concern to this paper. It addresses the substance of what is known as Radbruch’s formula: even though in plain cases law can contradict some principles of morality, if the law is extremely unjust it should not be applied/it cannot be considered as law at all. The paper analyses its implications for the legal doctrine, assessing it from the perspective of the addressees of this formula.
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 call
