What Is Law and Its Purpose

This law comes from the judiciary. Although the courts do not pass laws, they interpret them. This means that the judiciary bases its legal decisions on what is in the constitution and on previous court decisions in similar cases. Frédéric Bastiat, in his book The Law, helps us to define and understand the purpose of the law: Another word for looting is theft. Whenever the government or the people use the law as an instrument of looting/theft and the government as a robinhood, then the government`s goal turns to preventing injustice: after all, none of us would want to live in a world where the powerful are free to pray for the weak without any consequences. With this article, Lawrina.com Legal Portal attempts to determine the purpose of the law, as well as the role and functions of the law in any corporation. The purpose of the law cannot be to promote charity, for charity and violence are incompatible. Here again Bastiat`s point of view on the law: What is the purpose of the law? Let`s define it first, directly from Black`s Law Dictionary, sixth edition, page 884: He therefore offers the government to punish the author. The law serves many purposes. Of these, the four most important are policing, norm-setting, protection of freedoms and dispute resolution. The law serves many purposes. Four main reasons are norm-setting, policing, dispute resolution and the protection of freedoms and rights.

However, the system has become too systematized – too rigid and inflexible. As a result, over time, more and more citizens asked the King to repeal the common law and, on behalf of the King, the Lord Chancellor decided to do what was only in one case. Since the time of Sir Thomas More, the first barrister to be appointed Lord Chancellor, a systematic body of justice has developed alongside the rigid common law and has developed its own Court of Chancery. Initially, fairness was often criticized as unpredictable, varying according to the length of the chancellor`s foot. [101] Over time, the courts have developed sound principles, particularly under Lord Eldon. [102] In 19th century England and 1937 in the United States, the two systems were merged. In 1934, the Austrian philosopher Hans Kelsen continued the positivist tradition in his book „Queen Rechtstheorie”. [51] Kelsen believed that although the law is distinct from morality, it is endowed with „normativity,” meaning that we should obey it. While laws are positive statements (for example, the fine for reversing on a motorway is €500); The law tells us what we „should” do. Thus, it can be assumed that every legal system has a basic norm that commands us to obey. Kelsen`s main opponent, Carl Schmitt, rejected both positivism and the idea of the rule of law because he did not accept the primacy of abstract normative principles over concrete political positions and decisions.

[52] Schmitt therefore advocated jurisprudence on the exception (state of emergency), which denied that legal norms could encompass all political experience. [53] The law essentially draws the line between what is considered acceptable in a society and what is unacceptable. Even if norms, customs and traditions draw borders, crossing these borders does not necessarily have consequences. The law is a progressive part of any society. Legal rules and regulations keep our businesses intact and functional. Without law, chaos can easily rise in a world where the strong dominate the weak. It is important to understand what the purpose of law is in our society, because only then can we identify and appreciate the functions of the law it fulfills and how it affects us. Hegel believed that civil society and the state were poles apart in the schema of his dialectical theory of history.

The modern civil society of the dipole state has been reproduced in the theories of Alexis de Tocqueville and Karl Marx. [165] [166] In postmodern theory, civil society is necessarily a source of law by being the basis from which people form opinions and lobby for what they believe to be right. As Australian lawyer and author Geoffrey Robertson QC wrote about international law: „One of its most important modern sources is found in the reactions of ordinary men and women and non-governmental organizations who support many of them to the human rights violations they see on the television screen in their living rooms.” [167] Hugo Grotius, the founder of a purely rationalist system of natural law, argued that law arises both from a social impulse – as Aristotle had suggested – and from reason. [45] Immanuel Kant believed that a moral imperative requires that laws „be chosen as if they were to be regarded as universal laws of nature.” [46] Jeremy Bentham and his pupil Austin, following David Hume, believed that this confused the problem of the „east” with what should be.