On The Legal Interpretation In The Judgment

Judicial adjudication refers to a process in which the activities of the determination of the fact, and application of the law are involved according to the law in order to settle a dispute. The judgment is the result of the process. The judgment not only records the conditions of the civil litigant participants and the procedure in a case, but also finds a verdict for the contention and argument that the party issues in order to prove the justifiability of the judicial result. However, at present there are some problems with many judgments of the court: they only make a brief statement of the criminal facts and apply the law mechanically; there is no legal interpretation between the fact and the application of the law; they do not illustrate the reasons for the judgment; so the quality of the judgment needs improving. Beginning with the problems and reasons for the problems in the legal interpretations of the judgment in our country, the paper discusses the necessity and significance to strengthen the legal interpretation; it illustrates the nature and objects of the legal interpretation in the judgment; and it also puts forwards some suggestions to improve the judgment. The paper includes four chapters. Chapter I illustrates the problems and sticking points existing in the judgment in our country. Section One summarizes the problems in the judgment, which can be shown in the following three aspects: first, the legal interpretation is not laid out sufficiently in the judgment; second, the legal interpretation is mechanical and stiff; third, the consciousness and techniques of interpretation are deficient. Section Two makes an analysis of reasons for the above problems. Firstly, a comparison is made on the different application situations of legal interpretation in the judgment between the countries with the Anglo-American law system and those with the continental law system. The reasons for the differences lie in the fact that legal systems are different and that the types of cases entering the judicial trial are different. The judicial system in our country is more similar to that of the continental law system. The system factors that restricts the writing of the judgment in the continental law system also exist in the judicial system in China, and even more prominent. Secondly, the reasons from the society and the system of China itself are analyzed. There are mainly five perspectives: first, the traditional way of thinking of the Chinese people ignores the issue of methodology; second, the Chinese society pays little attention to the value of being procedural traditionally; third, there is such a high degree of homogeneousness in the Chinese society that the public hold a stable view on many judicial issues. Therefore, there is no basis for the judges to make legal interpretations; fourth, the court and judges in China takes up a lower position that those in the continental law system society; fifth, there is deficiency in exercising the adjudicative power. The judge has no assistant, so he /she has to take care of everything himself/herself. As a result, he/she spends little time and energy making the judgment. Section Three points out the necessity and significance to strengthen the legal interpretation of the judgment in our country. First, it can promote the generation of the legal belief, which is helpful for the construction of the rule of law; second, it can increase the persuasion of the judgment and improve the quality of judgment; third, it can restrict the judge to exercise the right of discretion so that the legal supervision can be strengthened. Chapter II discusses the nature and objects of the legal interpretation in the judgment. By comparing such two pairs of concepts as legal interpretation vs. judicial interpretation and judicial interpretation vs. judge interpretation, Section One defines that the nature of the legal interpretation in the judgment is the judge interpretation and that the body of interpretation is the judge. The legal interpretation in the judgment refers to the explanation and elaboration made for the abstract legal provisions and specific case facts by the judge on the basis of identified facts over the specific arguments according to the spirit of the law and the rationality of human beings. Section Two discusses the objects of the legal interpretation in the judgment. The first object is the legal facts. In many situations, the law will show its nature of non-distribution when combined with the facts, and the facts will show their fuzziness. Then comes the situation that it is difficult to say in the sense of law. Therefore, the judge's interpretation is needed on the inter-relationship between the facts and law. The second is the application of the law. The legalrules that are suited to the legal facts must be found when the judgment is given, but as there are both definiteness and fuzziness in the rules made up of words, the deficiency structure and elastic clauses also exist. Hence, when the one chooses the legal rule and applies to the corresponding case facts, the rule will show its fuzziness. At this time, the applicable person needs to make the indefinite concepts crystallized. Then the rule can be added to concrete interpretation and its meaning is made out, both of which constitute the basis of the grounds of decision. The third is the grounds of decision. The grounds of decision have the function of persuasion. The best way to prove the justifiability of the judgment is to state the grounds of decision in a frank way according to the will of the public. The legal interpretation offers evidence and basis for the result of judgment, which is a very important part in the grounds of decision. Chapter III discusses the basic requirements and means of the legal interpretation. Section One elaborates the basic requirementsof the legal interpretation. The first one is to explore the true meaning of the legal text. A good command of the true meaning of a legal text can help identify the basic direction of the legal interpretation and ultimately offers reasonable grounds for the justifiability of the legal interpretation in nature and form. The second one is to crystallize the meaning of the possibility of the legal norm. At first, the literal interpretation can be taken; and then when the legal norm is a little fuzzy, the interpreter can choose other meanings by taking the aim and interest into consideration. The third is that the interpretation should adapt itself to the changes and development of the society. The statute law cannot find any corresponding clauses with clear meaning for the new problems that rise in society. The interpreter should make the social effect prediction for every interpretation because the choice should accord with the social functioning law. Section Two introduces the basic means to legal interpretation. The first one is the semantic interpretation; the second one is the logical interpretation; the third one is the comparison method interpretation; and the fourth one is the sociological interpretation. Chapter IV puts forward suggestions of the improvement of the judgment. Section One points out that the interpretation idea should bechanged. The judge should not regard the law as a totally closed and logic self-sufficient system and apply it mechanically; but he/she should consider it as a open structure and tries to elucidate the implication of the law on the basis of a comprehensive measurement by means of combining the legal document with kinds of factors in the real life. Section Two argues that the quality of the interpretation body should be improved. The judicial judgment is a very professional job. The profession can be reflected intensively and concretely through the judgment, particularly through the application of the legal interpretation. As a professional jurist group, the judges should be of the characteristics of specialization, technicalization, and being essence. There is still a long way for the judge to go, so we should strengthen the judge's command of interpretation means and techniques and also improve his ability of practical application. Section Three expounds the construction of the legal profession community. In practice, a reason for the dissatisfaction of the public with the judgment is the problem of communication. The establishment of the legal profession community can meet the needs of communication. As for the process of the judicial behaviors, the application of the legal interpretation and the explanation of the grounds of decision should be understood by all the members of the legal profession community involved in the case.