
	Law and Politics Reference: Markov, P.V. Legal nature and conditions for use of judicial discretion. // Law and Politics. 2011. № 11. P. 1875-1881. URL: https://en.nbpublish.com/library_read_article.php?id=51628 Markov, P.V. Legal nature and conditions for use of judicial discretion. Abstract: The attitude to judicial discretion is much dependent on the understanding of law. The positive feature of rational idealistic approach is evaluation of discretion based on a united criterion of defi nition (idea) of law, which is understood as unity of principles of freedom, justice and formal equality. From the point of view of the rational idealistic approach judicial discretion is activity of the court on implementation of its powers under its understanding, which is aimed to overcome collisions and blanks in regulation, in order to form a legal and lawful decision. The conditions for the implementation of judicial discretion depend on specifi c features of the functioning of the judicial system, hierarchy of sources of law, practice of application of various means of interpretation of legislation and precedents, development of doctrine, adaptation of legal borrowing. Keywords: jurisprudence, discretion, positivism, realism, idealism, formalism, powers, lawfulness, precedent, abuse of discretion. This article is unavailable for unregistered users. Click to login or register References 1. Vinogradov P. G. Gospodstvo prava. M., 1911. 2. Dvorkin R. O Pravakh vser'ez. M., 2004. 3. Il'in I. A. Obshchee uchenie o prave i gosudarstve // Sobranie sochineniy v 10 t. T. 4. 4. Fuller L. Moral' prava. M., 2007. 5. Chicherin B. N. Filosofiya prava. M., 1904. 6. Shershenevich G. F. Primenenie norm prava // Zhurnal Ministerstva yustitsii. №1. Yanvar'. 1903. 7. Alexy R. The Argument from Injustice. A Reply to Legal Positivism. Clarendon Press. Oxford. 2004. 8. Coyle S. From Positivism To Idealism. Ashgate Publishing Company. 2007. 9. Dworkin R. A Matter of Principle. Harvard University Press. 1985. 10. Finnis J. On the incoherence of legal positivism // Notre Dame Law Review. 1999-2000. 11. Frank J. What courts do in fact. Part I. Illinois Law Review. Vol. 26. 1931-1932. 12. Leiter B. Legal Formalism and Legal Realism: What is the Issue? // Legal Theory. №16. 2010. 13. Kahan D., Hoffman D., Braman D. Whose Eyes Are You Going to Believe? Scott v. Harris and the Perils of Cognitive 14. Liberalism // Harvard Law Review. 2009. Vol. 122. №3. 15. Marmor A. Positive Law and Objective Values. Clarendon Press. Oxford. 2001. 16. Pound R. The Spirit of the Common Law. Boston, 1921.

Journals

Books

Markov, P.V. Legal nature and conditions for use of judicial discretion.