法律解释与法律续造的区分标准
陈坤法律解释与法律续造的区分标准
A New Criterion for the Distinction Between Legal Interpretation and Legal Renewal
期刊名称：《法学研究》
期刊年份：
作者：陈坤
单位：
中文关键词：法律解释;法律续造;文义可能性;立法意图;价值权衡
英文关键词：legal interpretation; legal renewal; the possible semantic meaning; legislative intent; value weighing
中文摘要：
法学方法论通说区分法律解释与法律续造，并在很长一段时间内以“文义可能性”作为区分标准。随着意义理论的发展与法律解释研究的深入，越来越多的学者认识到这一标准的不足，并提出了一些新标准。然而，这些标准要么外延宽窄不当，适用时会遇到反例；要么缺乏一般性与明确性，无法真正有效地区分解释与续造。一个合理的区分标准应当中立于不同的解释立场，使得同法治相关的各种价值理想都有机会参与到解释活动的权衡程序中。由此，可以基于已有标准提出一个复合标准：一个探究法律文本意义的活动是解释，当且仅当它：（1）是探究法律文本的规约性意义、说话者意义或真实意义的活动；或者（2）当不存在规约性意义时，是探究法律文本的合理意义的活动。
英文摘要：
The prevailing doctrine of legal methodology distinguishes between legal interpretation and legal renewal, and has taken “the possible semantic meaning” as the distinguishing criterion for a long time. With the development of meaning theory and the deepening of the study of legal interpretation, more and more scholars have realized the shortcomings of this criterion and proposed some new ones. But these new criteria are not satisfactory, for they either have an inappropriate extension, and thus encounter counterexamples, or lack of generality and/or clarity, and thus can’t effectively distinguish between renewal and interpretation. A proper criterion should be neutral to different positions of legal interpretation, so that various values related to the rule of law may have the opportunity to participate in the weighing process of legal interpretation. Based on reflections on criteria that have been proposed, a composite criterion can be advanced: an activity that explores the meaning of a legal text is interpretation, if and only if: (1) it is an activity that explores the conventional meaning, the speakers’ meaning, or the true meaning of the legal text; or (2) when conventional meaning does not exist in particular cases, it is an activity to explore the reasonable meaning of the legal text.
全文阅读： 点击下载
