A Term Paper On Justice Holmes'S Concept of Law: Adjunct Faculty Mr. Dev Mahat Nepal Law Campus
A Term Paper On Justice Holmes'S Concept of Law: Adjunct Faculty Mr. Dev Mahat Nepal Law Campus
Submitted to
Submitted by
Roll no: 60
Section: B
Realist school studies law in its actual working and rejects the traditional definition
of law i.e body of rules,
What the judges decides depends upon human factors(ideology, religion, sex,
gender, prejudices, etc)
AMERICAN REALIST-
John Chipman Gray(1839-1915)
Justice Oliver wendell Holmes(1841-1935)
Jeorme Frank(1889-1957)
Karl Llewellyn(1893-1962)
SCANDINAVIAN REALIST
o Axel Hagelstorm(1868-1939)
Karl Olivercrona(1897-1980)
Alf Ross(1899-1979)
This founder of the American realist movement said that "the life of the law is experience, not
logic." He treats rules as "prophecies of future decisions" or "the prophecies of what the court
will do in fact, and nothing more pretentious are I mean by the law." According to Holmes, if
we wish to know law, we should look at it through the eyes of a bad man.
For him, analysis must exclude moral questions and he urged the deliberate
exclusion from one’s study of law of ‘every word of moral significance’.
He argued that the training of lawyers ought to lead them, and judges, ‘habitually to
consider more definitely and explicitly’ the advantages to society of the rules they lay
down.
Holmes believed that the law should be defined as a prediction, most specifically, a
prediction of how the courts behave. His rationale was based on an argument
regarding the opinion of a "bad man." Bad men, Holmes argued in his speech "The
Path of the Law", care little for ethics or lofty conceptions of natural law; instead they
care simply about staying out of jail and avoiding the payment of damages. In
Holmes's mind, therefore, it was most useful to define "the law" as a prediction of
what will bring punishment or other consequences from a court.
Critique of formalism:
He has rejected the legal formal theories, denied the utilitarian view that law was a set
of commands of the sovereign, rules of conduct that became legal duties. He rejected
as well the views of the German idealist philosophers, whose views were then widely
held, and the philosophy taught at Harvard, that the opinions of judges could be
harmonized in a purely logical system. In the opening paragraphs of the book, he
famously summarized his own view of the history of the common law: the life of the
law has not been logic: it has been experience. The felt necessities of the time, the
prevalent moral and political theories, intuitions of public policy, avowed or
unconscious, and even the prejudices which judges share with their fellow-men, have
had a good deal more to do than the syllogism in determining the rules by which men
should be governed. The law embodies the story of a nation's development through
many centuries, and it cannot be dealt with as if it contained only the axioms and
corollaries of a book of mathematics.
Criticisms:
Underestimated the importance of the legal principles and rules regarding the law.
In his concept there was no law made before, but always was a puzzle of unconnected
decisions.
His perception of law rests upon the subjective fantasies and life experience of the
judge who is deciding the case. Therefore there can’t be any certainty and definiteness
about the law.
The concentration is ideally on litigation, but the point is there is a bigger point that
never comes in front of the courts.
He had also launched a serious attack on the juristic complications and myth of
certainty. But, in actual sense we found out that a huge amount of certainty and
bunch of transactions regulates the judgment.
Put strong emphasis on a factor which is human in nature. No doubt, it plays quite a
huge part but that does not mean that the judicial determinations are the result of a
Judge’s personality.
Via:
THANKYOU