Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-5d6d958fb5-x2fsp Total loading time: 0.795 Render date: 2022-11-29T08:19:04.494Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "displayNetworkTab": true, "displayNetworkMapGraph": false, "useSa": true } hasContentIssue true

2 - Structures within Criminal Legal Reasoning

from Part I - Criminal Law

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 February 2022

Kai Ambos
Affiliation:
Judge Kosovo Specialist Chambers, The Hague
Antony Duff
Affiliation:
University of Stirling
Alexander Heinze
Affiliation:
Georg-August-Universität, Göttingen, Germany
Julian Roberts
Affiliation:
University of Oxford
Thomas Weigend
Affiliation:
University of Cologne (Emeritus)
Get access

Summary

How do criminal lawyers sequence and give shape to their reasoning about criminal liability? Why do they ‘structure’ it as they do? This chapter looks at structure within legal reasoning as a means of understanding the law in the minds of criminal lawyers. It seeks to better understand how structures function and interact. One benefit of doing so is to help lawyers foreign to the legal systems analyse liability as a native might. Another benefit is that, by looking at two paradigmatic orchestrations of the many substantive, organisational and practical issues within criminal legal reasoning, the interconnectedness, priority and valuing of those elements can be revealed and made comparable.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2022

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aarnio, A., Alexy, R. and Peczenik, A., On Coherence Theory of Law, Juristförlaget i Lund (1998).Google Scholar
Borghetti, J.-S., ‘Legal Methodology and the Role of Professors in France. Professorenrecht is not a French Word!’, in Basedow, J., Fleischer, H. and Zimmermann, R. (eds.), Legislators, Judges, and Professors, Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck (2016), 209–22.Google Scholar
Burchard, C., ‘Strafverfassungsrecht – Vorüberlegungen zu einem Schlüsselbegriff’, in Tiedemann, K., Sieber, U., Satzger, H., Burchard, C. and Brodowski, D. (eds.), Die Verfassung moderner Strafrechtspflege, Baden-Baden, Nomos (2016), 2562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chalmers, J., ‘“Frenzied Law Making”: Overcriminalization by Numbers’, Current Legal Problems, 67 (2014), 483502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christopher, R., ‘Tripartite Structures of Criminal Law in Germany and Other Civil Law Jurisdictions’, Cardozo Law Review, 28 (2007), 2675–95.Google Scholar
Dubber, M., ‘The Promise of German Criminal Law: A Science of Crime and Punishment’, German Law Journal, 6 (2005), 1049–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dyson, M., ‘Overlap, Separation and Hybridity across Crime and Tort’, in Dyson, M. and Vogel, B. (eds.), The Limits of Criminal Law, Cambridge, Intersentia (2018), 79106.Google Scholar
Dyson, M. and Green, S., ‘The Properties of the Law: Restoring Personal Property through Crime and Tort’, in Dyson, M. (ed.), Unravelling Tort and Crime, Cambridge University Press (2014), 389421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dyson, M. and Randall, J., ‘England’s Splendid Isolation’, in Dyson, M. (ed.), Comparing Tort and Crime, Cambridge University Press (2015), 1872.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engisch, K., Einführung in das juristische Denken, 11th edn, Stuttgart, Kohlhammer (2010).Google Scholar
Fletcher, G. P., Basic Concepts of Criminal Law, Oxford University Press (1998).Google Scholar
Grammar of Criminal Law, Oxford University Press (2007).Google Scholar
Hart, H. L. A., ‘The Ascription of Responsibility and Rights’, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 49 (1949), 171–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jahn, M., ‘Strafverfassungsrecht: Das Grundgesetz als Herausforderung für die Dogmatik des Straf- und Strafverfahrensrechts’, in Tiedemann, K., Sieber, U., Satzger, H., Burchard, C. and Brodowski, D (eds.), Die Verfassung moderner Strafrechtspflege, Baden-Baden, Nomos (2016), 6386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jescheck, H.-H. and Weigend, T., Lehrbuch des Strafrechts Allgemeiner Teil, 5th edn, Berlin, Duncker & Humblot (1996).Google Scholar
Naucke, W., ‘An Insider’s Perspective on the Significance of the German Criminal Theory’s General System for Analyzing Criminal Acts’, Brigham Young University Law Review, 305 (1984), 305–21.Google Scholar
Radbruch, G. L., ‘Jurisprudence in the Criminal Law’, Journal of Comparative Legislation and International Law, 18 (1936), 212–25.Google Scholar
Robinson, P. H., ‘Should the Criminal Law Abandon the Actus Reus-Mens Rea Distinction?’, in Robinson, P. H. and Barton, J. S. (eds.), The Structure and Limits of Criminal Law, Farnham, Ashgate (2014), 126.Google Scholar
Simpson, A. W. B., Cannibalism and the Common Law, University of Chicago Press (1984).Google Scholar
Stark, F., ‘It’s Only Words: On Meaning and Mens Rea’, Cambridge Law Journal, 72 (2013), 155–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thier, A., ‘Das Werk von Claus-Wilhelm Canaris und die europäische Rechtstradition: Das “System” als Beispiel’, in Grigoleit, H. C. and Petersen, J. (eds.), Privatrechtsdogmatik im 21. Jahrhundert. Festschrift für Claus-Wilhelm Canaris zum 80. Geburtstag, Berlin, De Gruyter (2017), 2950.Google Scholar
Whitman, J., ‘No Right Answer?’, in Jackson, J., Langer, M. and Tillers, P. (eds.), Crime, Procedure and Evidence in a Comparative and International Context, Oxford, Hart (2008), 371–92.Google Scholar
Wolf, W., ‘Richterliche Entscheidungsroutinen als Gegenstand und Leitfaden der juristischen Methodenlehre: zivilrechtliche Perspektiven’, in Reimer, F. (ed.), Juristische Methodenlehre aus dem Geist der Praxis?, Baden-Baden, Nomos (2016), 7590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×