Sin categoría

Why Legal Knowledge Is Important

However, a corporate library, while one of many office libraries on two or three continents, will primarily handle inquiries and resources related to its home office practice groups as well as general legal practice. The latter area of law itself has a strong judicial component, since actions and limitation periods usually take place in a specific geographical location and are therefore subject to its jurisdiction. As a result, a library`s print collection, subscribed databases, and typical reference question generally refer to the actual statutes (and interpretive secondary sources) of the legal system that governs its local office and to the law relevant to that office`s areas of activity. While a practice group often has company-wide staff and projects, librarians tend to answer questions from team members in their local offices. In response to the attack on the entire concept of law by law and economics and critical jurisprudence, most jurists now recognize that the law has only a temporary coherence. Their value is no longer determined by their internal logic, but by their ability to achieve political and social goals. For most scholars, however, law is not simply a set of independent provisions that achieve these goals, but a system with institutional and conceptual characteristics. In order to have legal knowledge, one must know the characteristics of this system; To use this knowledge, predictions or regulations must be made about how this system achieves independently set objectives. Thus, data from fields such as economics, sociology, political science, anthropology and psychology become directly relevant to jurisprudence. Some of this data comes from works that do not deal specifically with law, such as organizational theory or cognitive psychology, but much comes from modern social law studies in which law is the explicit concern of the social scientist. But this work, as useful as it is, does not replace jurisprudence. The lawyer continues to play a crucial role in deciding how these data are used by the institutional and conceptual elements of the legal system.

Indeed, jurists have recently begun to re-emphasize these conceptual elements, arguing that law has a wide range of symbolic and constitutive roles in a richly described social context (Habermas 1996, Lessig 1995, Luhmann 1995) (see Law, Autopoiesis in; Constituting Act). Social law scholars have recognized this as an empirical fact and have therefore taken advantage of the greater susceptibility of case law to social science data by focusing more on the internal characteristics of the legal system. The result is a partial elimination of the distinction between external science and internal science, without it being completely eliminated. This combination of interactions leads to overlapping areas of law. These areas may be procedural and substantively unclear. The commercial enterprises they enter often need specialized advice in several practice areas, so they entrust their business to large commercial law firms, the proven one-stop legal windows for a rapidly globalizing world. To meet this demand, large companies offer expert departments that focus on specific areas of law such as taxation, shipping or real estate. These highly experienced groups coordinate international offices and project teams to effectively address the challenges of modern business transactions, which often involve many legal issues in addition to multiple parties and their different jurisdictions.

Smets (2008) suggests that “the relevant issue for clients when seeking a professional advisor is not so much the firm`s overall reputation, which may not be of much interest to the client or is not in a position to make judgments, but that of the targeted practice.” In certain legal situations, such as a divorce or a crime, it is important to have a good lawyer. As a tenant, it`s also important to know your state`s laws regarding your rights as a tenant as well as the landlord`s rights. Hage and Verheij point out that enforcement of rules is much more than just a modus ponens. It includes considerations about the validity and applicability of a rule and the balancing of the reasons for and against the consequences of the rule. RBL distinguishes between two levels of legal knowledge. The primary layer contains the principles and objectives, while the secondary layer contains the rules. Principles and objectives express reasons for or against a conclusion. Without the secondary level, these reasons would have to be weighed anyway to reach a conclusion, but according to the rules of Hage and Verheij, they express the result of such a balancing process.

Therefore, a provision creates not only a ground for its consequence, but also an “exclusive” reason against the application of the principles underlying it: the rule replaces the grounds on which it is based. This view is similar to Dworkin`s well-known view that, although principles are weighed against each other, rules apply all or nothing [52]. However, according to [173], this difference is only a matter of degree: if new reasons arise which have not been taken into account in the formulation of the rule, these new reasons are not excluded by the rule; The justification for the rule still needs to be compared with the justification for the new principles. Therefore, rules and principles are syntactically indistinguishable in RBL; Their difference is reflected only in their degree of interaction with other rules and principles. Law firm librarianship will remain a dynamic and resilient profession as long as it effectively addresses two defining qualities of law firm practice: the monetization of time and the contextualized complexity of legal knowledge. However, it is not enough to have a high level of expertise and knowledge. In addition, government policies and regulators also influence legal practice. Implementation of the strategy for the implementation of the strategy, taking into account national resources, legal and constitutional frameworks, and management of development and implementation These developments in law and economics, external research and standard jurisprudence represent a process that spans the entire course of the twentieth century, through which the distinction between internal and external science, and between jurisprudence and doctrine have been partially eliminated. This process has important implications for the dominant conception of legal knowledge, which can be illustrated by examining a fourth aspect of contemporary research, namely socio-legal studies. The questioning of the notion of law, the diversity of responses and the resulting wider methodological range of science have also partially eliminated the distinction between jurisprudence and teaching. The fundamental questions about the nature and purpose of law and the nature of legal knowledge must now be resolved by scholars engaged in detailed doctrinal analysis.

Such questions can, of course, be ignored for simplicity`s sake, but the work will be questioned by those who question its fundamental premises. Again, the distinction has not been completely abolished; In practice, many scholars are content with an analysis of doctrine within one or another sub-discipline of jurisprudence and let others fight the more theoretical battles on their behalf. But most recognize that the status of their work as legal knowledge depends on theoretical arguments, and in a more immediate way than it was a century earlier. Public legal education, also known as legal knowledge, helps raise public awareness of legal cultures. In addition, it provides everyone with standard survival guidelines. It is true that “knowledge is power”, as they say. A person with an education would be aware of his or her rights and obligations. Indeed, the France, attached to civil justice, has historically given the judge a passive role, leaving it to the parties to lay charges. [5] Nevertheless, the common law culture consists primarily of oral pleadings, in which legal representatives direct the case in pursuit of justice and rights empowerment.

When the term “leverage” is used, it generally refers to lawyers, that is, the relationship between shareholders and partners.