Legal Interpretation and Integration: A Comprehensive Guide
ITEM 6. APPLICATION, INTERPRETATION, AND INTEGRATION OF RULES
1. The Application of Standards and Activity
Applying a rule to a particular case is fundamental to the legal system. Rules serve a social function, and applying them involves two key activities:
- Establishing the facts of the case.
- Selecting the appropriate legal standard to apply.
2. Legal Interpretation
Legal interpretation involves investigating the meaning of a legal provision. The legislator who created the rule can provide an authentic interpretation, which describes the intended meaning and is often found in a preamble. Other important interpretations come from:
- Courts: Judges interpret rules through their decisions.
- Doctrine: Legal scholars and commentators offer interpretations through their writings.
The goal of interpretation is to understand the will of the legislator and the true sense of the rule. Our legislature does not adhere to a single method of interpretation but welcomes various approaches, including:
- Grammatical Criterion: Analyzing the plain meaning of the words, considering that words can have multiple meanings.
- Systematic Approach: Understanding the meaning of words within the context of the entire legal code or the specific part where the rule is located.
- Historical Criterion: Examining the historical context in which the rule was created and the social reality it aimed to address.
- Sociological Criterion: Adapting the interpretation of a rule to current circumstances, recognizing that society evolves and the law must adapt.
- Teleological or Finalist Criterion: Considering the purpose or goal of the rule, often referred to as the “spirit of the law.”
- Equity: Seeking a just outcome in cases where applying the rule strictly would lead to unfair consequences. Judges can consider equity when permitted by the legislature.
When applying a rule, it’s crucial to consider both the specific circumstances of the case and the principles of equity, while always adhering to the law.
3. Integration of Legal Norms: Analogy
Integrating legal norms involves addressing cases not explicitly covered by existing rules (gaps in the law). Judges cannot refuse to issue a judgment due to the absence of a specific rule. Our legal system strives for completeness but acknowledges that gaps exist. Tools for filling these gaps include custom, general principles of law, and analogy.
Analogy involves applying a rule or provision designed for a different but similar situation, ensuring that the outcome is fair and just. The rationale behind analogy is that if the legislature had considered the specific case, they would have likely applied a similar solution due to the resemblance between the situations.
There are two types of analogy:
- Analogia Legis: Applying a specific rule to a similar case (analogy of law).
- Analogia Iuris: Using several provisions to address a situation not explicitly regulated, drawing upon similar solutions from related cases (analogy of law).
Certain rules are not suitable for analogy:
- Criminal Rules: Analogy cannot create new crimes.
- Exceptional Standards: Rules designed for specific situations cannot be generalized through analogy.
- Temporary Rules: Rules with a limited timeframe cannot be extended beyond their intended duration.
Arguments for integrating rules include:
- A Simile: Finding a solution based on similarity to a case decided by the legislature, even if the situations are not identical.
- A Contrario: When something is not allowed, everything else is permitted (e.g., “No dogs allowed” implies other animals are permitted).