The article analyses the practice of using general theoretical provisions, studied within the discipline «General Theory and Philosophy of Law», in the argumentative parts of court decisions. The decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, the Constitutional Court of Ukraine as well as the Supreme Court were chosen as the objects of the research. It is established that in its decisions, the European Court of Human Rights often uses such theoretical constructions as «legal guarantees of human rights», «limits of using human rights» and «legal relations» as a component of argumentation, defines quality criteria of legislative acts and approaches to the interpretation of evaluative concepts. Interpreting constitutional norms, the Constitutional Court of Ukraine operates with such general theoretical provisions as «social state: concept and features», «rule of law: concept and elements», «legal regulation of public relations», «legal acts: concept, types», «legality», «validity and direction of normative legal acts action». Such institutions of general theory of law as «collisions of legal norms and ways to overcome them», «gaps in legislation and ways to overcome them», «hidden shortcomings of normative legal acts of Ukraine and ways to overcome them» have been chosen for argumentation in the decisions of the Supreme Court. Attention is drawn to the fact that the court practice simultaneously illustrates the need to develop general theoretical provisions and their adaptation to the needs of direct law enforcement. The proposal to introduce a separate topic of legal technique into the course of general theory and philosophy of law is substantiated. This topic should cover three main types of legal techniques: norm drafting, law interpretation and law enforcement. Emphasis is placed on the importance of studying the topic «Defects in normative legal acts: concept, types, methods of elimination and overcoming». In particular, it should formulate a theoretical model of the hierarchy of ways to overcome collisions and inconsistencies between legal norms. It is proposed to expand the study of such general theoretical blocks as «Legal guarantees and limits of using human rights», «Legal acts», «Quality of legislative acts», «Interpretative legal acts». The opinion is expressed about the expediency of studying a new topic «Legal Argumentation» within the general theory of law. The necessity of normative consolidation of basic provisions of the general theory of law, in particular in the laws on normative legal acts or principles of law-making is pointed out.
Read full abstract