论文部分内容阅读
法律解释是解释主体基于价值判断选择解释对象和运用解释方法的结果。法律解释之价值判断围绕具体的案件事实以及与具体的案件事实直接相关的法律文本展开。在私法领域,对事实文本予以解释并赋予其法律上的意义,要比解释相应的私法规范的法律文本更有价值。因为价值判断的主观认识,法律解释的结论总是相对的。文义解释是法律解释的起点,在一系列的法律解释方法中居于绝对优先地位,尊重法律文本的文义,自身就是价值判断的产物。法律文本未经由文义解释,就不能作论理解释。论理解释对于澄清因为文义解释而产生的歧义具有意义,但其并不单纯为消除文义解释的“歧义”而被利用。论理解释的诸方法究竟应当在什么场合使用,并不取决于该方法的使用有无先后位序,而取决于法律文本解释者的价值判断,论理解释方法对于调节法律文本解释的文义偏差的作用也是相对的。
Legal interpretation is the result of explaining the subject’s choice of interpretation object and the method of interpretation based on value judgment. The value judgments of legal interpretation revolve around the specific facts of the case and the legal texts directly related to the facts of the case. In the field of private law, it is more valuable to interpret the factual text and give it legal meaning than to interpret the legal text of the corresponding private law norms. Because of the subjective knowledge of value judgments, the conclusions of legal interpretation are always relative. Literary interpretation is the starting point of legal interpretation. It occupies absolute priority in a series of legal interpretation methods. Respecting the literary meaning of legal texts is the product of value judgment. Legal texts can not be rationally interpreted without a literal interpretation. Argumentative interpretations make sense for clarifying ambiguities arising from the interpretation of texts, but they are not simply exploited to eliminate the “ambiguity” of textual interpretations. Whether the method of reasoning should be used at any occasion does not depend on whether the method should be used or not, but depends on the value judgments of the interpreter of the legal texts. The reasoning method is not suitable for adjusting the meanings of the texts in the legal texts The role is relative.