- About
-
The Global ETD Search service is a free service for researchers
to find electronic theses and dissertations. This service is
provided by the
Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations.
Our metadata is collected from universities around the world. If you manage a university/consortium/country archive and want to be added, details can be found on the NDLTD website.
Search results
Showing 1 to 9 of 9 (0.038 seconds)Spelling suggestions: "subject:"gustav radbruch"" "subject:"gustav radbruchs""
| 1 |
Der Kampf gegen das Unrecht : Gustav Radbruchs Theorie eines Kulturverfassungsrechts /Durth, Hanno. January 2001 (has links) (PDF)
Univ., Diss.--Frankfurt (Main), 2001.
|
| 2 |
Überpositives Recht als Prüfungsmaßstab im Geltungsbereich des Grundgesetzes? : eine kritische Würdigung der Rezeption der Radbruchschen Formel und des Naturrechtsgedankens in der Rechtsprechung /Dieckmann, Hubertus-Emmanuel. January 1900 (has links) (PDF)
Univ., Diss.--Frankfurt/M., 2005. / Literaturverz. S. [206] - 228.
|
| 3 |
Der Weg von nationalsozialistischen Rechtslehren zur Radbruchschen Formel Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der Idee vom "Unrichtigen Recht"Scheuren-Brandes, Christoph M. January 2006 (has links)
Zugl.: Diss.
|
| 4 |
Der Entwurf eines Allgemeinen Deutschen Strafgesetzbuches von 1922 (Entwurf Radbruch)Goltsche, Friederike. January 1900 (has links)
Thesis (doctoral)--FernUniversität in Hagen, 2008. / Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references (p. [404]-423).
|
| 5 |
Die Radbruchsche Formel in den höchstrichterlichen "Mauerschützenurteilen"Forschner, Steffen. January 2003 (has links) (PDF)
Tübingen, Univ., Diss., 2003.
|
| 6 |
Überpositives Recht als Prüfungsmassstab im Geltungsbereich des Grundgesetzes? : eine kritische Würdigung der Rezeption der Radbruchschen Formel und des Naturrechtsgedankens in der Rechtsprechung /Dieckmann, Hubertus-Emmanuel. January 2006 (has links)
Thesis (doctoral)-- Universität Frankfurt a. M., 2005. / Includes bibliographical references (p. [206]-228) and index.
|
| 7 |
Gerechtigkeit als Strafgrund : die Radbruchsche Formel in den Mauerschützenurteilen /Haußühl, Lars. January 2006 (has links)
Universiẗat, Diss.--Köln, 2006. / Literaturverz. S. 5 - 33.
|
| 8 |
Volné nalézání práva (příčiny a důsledky) / Free law-finding (causes and consequences)Henčeková, Slavomíra January 2021 (has links)
Free law-finding (causes and consequences) Abstract This dissertation deals with the phenomenon of free law-finding and analyses its causes and consequences. The introduction outlines the aim of the dissertation, reasons for choosing this topic, the current state of research, especially in the Czech-Slovak legal environment, methodology and also briefly the issue of causality in general. The main part of the dissertation is divided in two parts. The first part contains description and analysis of the German Free Law Movement (Freirechtsschule) from the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries led by the German legal scholar Hermann Kantorowicz and his manifesto The Battle for Legal Science (Der Kampf um die Rechtswissenschaft), which formed the theoretical basis of the Free Law Movement and, thus, also of this dissertation. In this part, the lives and works of the main representatives of the Free Law Movement are discussed (Hermann Kantorowicz, Ernst Fuchs, Eugen Ehrlich), but also some others are mentioned including Gustav Radbruch. At the end of the first part, the analysis of the free law in the theory of the Free Law Movement is provided, as well es of the causes and consequences which have led to the emergence and existence of the Free Law Movement; finally, the analysis of the consequences of the Free Law...
|
| 9 |
A Pragmatic Standard of Legal ValidityTyler, John 2012 May 1900 (has links)
American jurisprudence currently applies two incompatible validity standards to determine which laws are enforceable. The natural law tradition evaluates validity by an uncertain standard of divine law, and its methodology relies on contradictory views of human reason. Legal positivism, on the other hand, relies on a methodology that commits the analytic fallacy, separates law from its application, and produces an incomplete model of law.
These incompatible standards have created a schism in American jurisprudence that impairs the delivery of justice. This dissertation therefore formulates a new standard for legal validity. This new standard rejects the uncertainties and inconsistencies inherent in natural law theory. It also rejects the narrow linguistic methodology of legal positivism.
In their stead, this dissertation adopts a pragmatic methodology that develops a standard for legal validity based on actual legal experience. This approach focuses on the operations of law and its effects upon ongoing human activities, and it evaluates legal principles by applying the experimental method to the social consequences they produce. Because legal history provides a long record of past experimentation with legal principles, legal history is an essential feature of this method.
This new validity standard contains three principles. The principle of reason requires legal systems to respect every subject as a rational creature with a free will. The principle of reason also requires procedural due process to protect against the punishment of the innocent and the tyranny of the majority. Legal systems that respect their subjects' status as rational creatures with free wills permit their subjects to orient their own behavior. The principle of reason therefore requires substantive due process to ensure that laws provide dependable guideposts to individuals in orienting their behavior.
The principle of consent recognizes that the legitimacy of law derives from the consent of those subject to its power. Common law custom, the doctrine of stare decisis, and legislation sanctioned by the subjects' legitimate representatives all evidence consent.
The principle of autonomy establishes the authority of law. Laws must wield supremacy over political rulers, and political rulers must be subject to the same laws as other citizens. Political rulers may not arbitrarily alter the law to accord to their will.
Legal history demonstrates that, in the absence of a validity standard based on these principles, legal systems will not treat their subjects as ends in themselves. They will inevitably treat their subjects as mere means to other ends. Once laws do this, men have no rest from evil.
|
Page generated in 0.0472 seconds