Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Hart's conception of law had parallels to the Pure Theory of Law formulated by Austrian legal philosopher Hans Kelsen, though Hart rejected several distinctive features of Kelsen's theory. Significant in the differences between Hart and Kelsen was the emphasis on the British version of positive law theory which Hart was defending as opposed to ...
Already in 1913, Kelsen had identified the need for a legal theoretic framework to support the idea of the Rechtsstaat. [5]Adolf Julius Merkl [de; pt] was a student of Kelsen's who made important contributions starting in 1918 in the area of hierarchy of norms that would help underpin some of Kelsen's ideas on norms and how they fit into his pure theory of law.
'Basic norm ' (German: Grundnorm) is a concept in the Pure Theory of Law created by Hans Kelsen, a jurist and legal philosopher. Kelsen used this word to denote the basic norm, order, or rule that forms an underlying basis for a legal system.
In Kelsen's view, the validity of a legal norm derives from a higher norm, creating a hierarchy that ultimately rests on a "basic norm": this basic norm, not the sovereign, is the ultimate source of legal authority. In addition to Kelsen, other prominent legal positivists of the 20th century include H. L. A. Hart and Joseph Raz.
Hans Kelsen (/ ˈ k ɛ l s ən /; German: [ˈhans ˈkɛlsən]; October 11, 1881 – April 19, 1973) was an Austrian jurist, legal philosopher and political philosopher.He was the principal architect of the 1920 Austrian Constitution, which with amendments is still in operation.
The Concept of Law is a 1961 book by the legal philosopher H. L. A. Hart and his most famous work. [1] The Concept of Law presents Hart's theory of legal positivism—the view that laws are rules made by humans and that there is no inherent or necessary connection between law and morality—within the framework of analytic philosophy.
Hart argued that the law should be understood as a system of social rules. In The Concept of Law, Hart rejected Kelsen's views that sanctions were essential to law and that a normative social phenomenon, like law, cannot be grounded in non-normative social facts. Hart claimed that law is the union of primary rules and secondary rules. [46]
Hart explains legal normativity by drawing references to social facts instead of Kelsen's approach that displays a methodological dualism. Unlike Kelsen's belief of the radical independence of law from morality leads him to defend that legal theory is fundamentally value-free, Hart does not champion such an extreme view and instead endorses ...