Research On Legal Interpretation In The Precedent System Of Anglo-american Law System

To explore how to understand and practice legal interpretation in common law countries based on precedent system is a necessary aspect to fully and reasonably understand and practice the subject of legal interpretation.Although there are many institutional and historical origins and connections,there are many substantial and fundamental differences in the application of legal interpretation between the United Kingdom and the United States,both of which are members of Anglo-American Law System.To analyze and understand the differences between the two countries in the theory and practice of legal interpretation is obviously of great significance to grasp the basic theory and practice of legal interpretation in precedent system of Anglo-American law system effectively.This research consists of five parts in structure.In addition to the first chapter introduction,the content of this study is embodied in the basic theory of legal interpretation,the comparison of the principles of legal interpretation between the United Kingdom and the United States,the comparison of the specific practice of legal interpretation between the United Kingdom and the United States,and the main reasons for the differences between the two countries,which are four basic levels of logical connection and progressive progression.Firstly,the second chapter explains the basic theory of legal interpretation,which provides a theoretical analysis tool for the systematic development and promotion of this research.Legal interpretation can be summarized as the process of understanding and explaining the meaning of legal norms;The field of legal interpretation is located in judicial judgment.Further,in terms of specific ways or technologies of legal interpretation,both precedent and statutes follow the basic theoretical logical path that the interpretation position determines the interpretation view and the interpretation view influences the interpretation method.In addition,there are two basic tendenciesin the choice of legal interpretation methods: formal interpretation and substantive interpretation.Secondly,the third and fourth chapters explore and compare the differences in the legal interpretation principles and practices of the representative United Kingdom and the United States in the Anglo-American legal system under the background of the precedent system.In the third chapter,from the perspective of the principle of legal interpretation,based on the legitimacy of legal gap-filling,the selection of legal interpretation materials and the resolution of interpretation arguments,the United Kingdom takes the objective legislative intent of the intention of the legislator as the first choice,and pays more attention to the meaning of the text to explore the intention of the legislator.The United States,on the other hand,attaches great importance to the position of interpreter,and intends to obtain the interpretation of the objective meaning of legal norms from the perspective of substantive value.The fourth chapter explains that in the aspect of practice of precedent interpretation,there are formal and substantive differences between the United Kingdom and the United States due to the differences in the legal interpretation principles between two countries.The binding force of precedents and the application technology of precedents in the United Kingdom show that precedents have obvious hierarchical relationship,should be strictly applied and are extremely difficult to overturn.The United States shows that it can easily overturn previous precedents based on substantive reasons.The greater freedom in the application of precedents leads to the weakening of the overall binding force of the precedent system.Finally,the fifth chapter explores the main reasons for the differences in the specific ways of legal interpretation between the United Kingdom and the United States based on studies above.Which legal interpretation position is in the dominant position is the fundamental reason for the difference in the specific interpretation methods between the United Kingdom and the United States,which is related to the allocation of basic resources of legal interpretation,and the distribution of basic resources of the legitimacy of legal interpretation is closely related to a country's judicial system,historical experience and the background of legal theory.