Empirical Gap in Jurisprudence : A Comprehensive Study of the Supreme Court of Canada /

Mostrar otras versiones (2)

In jurisprudential writing, single decisions are often held up as representative without any evidence to support their representative claims. In order to address this problem, Daved Muttart has made a systematic study encompassing every judgment of the Supreme Court of Canada between 1950 and 2003.E...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Clasificación:Libro Electrónico
Autor principal: Muttart, Daved (Autor)
Formato: Electrónico eBook
Idioma:Inglés
Publicado: Toronto : University of Toronto Press, [2016]
Colección:Heritage
Temas:
Judgments > Canada.
Judicial process > Canada.
LAW / Courts.
Acceso en línea:Texto completo
Texto completo
Tabla de Contenidos:
  • Frontmatter
  • Contents
  • Tables and Figures
  • Preface
  • Acknowledgments
  • Section I. Setting the Stage
  • 1. Introduction
  • 2. Possible Solutions: Case Study of the Supreme Court of Canada
  • 3. Beginning to Close the Empirical Gap
  • Section II. Measuring the Court's Decisions
  • 4. Fact, Law, and Policy
  • 5. Modes of Legal Reasoning
  • 6. Changing the Law
  • 7. Other Trends: Bright Lines to Principles
  • 8. Judicial Attitudes and Other Interesting Findings
  • 9. Charter Cases Are Different
  • Section III. Testing Theories
  • 10. How Judges Judge: Testing Legal Theory
  • 11. Is Legal Reasoning Autonomous?
  • 12. Is the Supreme Court of Canada 'Too' Activist?
  • 13. Conclusion: The Gap Has Been Narrowed
  • Notes
  • Glossary
  • Bibliography
  • Index

Ejemplares similares