Creating law of interpretation: a risky or fundamental step?

Abstract

In some countries there is no legislation regulating legal interpretation, but in others, various interpretive tools and guidelines are regulated by the legislature. The regulation of interpretation is primarily considered an opportunity to increase legal certainty. Some authors note, however, that statutory regulation of legal interpretation involves certain risks, such as the danger of violating the principle of separation of powers. Questions also arise as to whether the legislator has the right to bind future legislators, whether the law of interpretation can have retroactive effect, and how to interpret the interpretative provisions. This paper addresses these challenges. In discussing this matter, it refers to the regulations of four countries: Australia, Spain, Ireland, and Poland. Each of them serves as an example of adopting different solutions to the problem of interpretation regulation. The main argument is that the legislature can regulate interpretation, either through direct or indirect legislative intervention. To a large extent, law of interpretation can enhance uniformity in a preventive manner and restore disturbed certainty by providing mechanisms to resolve serious discrepancies in judicial practice. It can also serve as a safeguard for other principles and values.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 8 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.