HUKUKA GİRİŞ

“Thinking like a lawyer” always deserves high praise. But why? Is there something unique about thinking like a lawyer and ordinary thinking? Other professions also have their special expertise. Yet, one does not hear similar remarks like “thinking like a doctor” or “thinking like an engineer.” There is a significant difference between a lawyer and other professions. As Professor Weinreb observes: “The reasoning of a doctor or an engineer is readily and in the normal course put to the test. The patient’s health improves, or it does not; the bridge stands, or it falls. There is no comparable test of legal reasoning.” Accordingly, the outcome of legal reasoning does not furnish an objective test of its merit; lawyers give special attention to legal reasoning. The correct answer is E.

Germany, for instance, is occasionally referred to as the land of Rechtswissenschaft, which literally means “legal science”. Germany is, therefore, known for its seemingly relentless legal conceptualism and systematization. In France, the term “sciences juridiques” likewise refers to the legal research as “science’. The correcet answer is E.

Textual (Literal) Interpretation; Literal interpretation, also known as grammatical or semiotic interpretation, requires an investigation into the semantic content and the syntactic structure of a provision. The correct answer is D.

Systematic Interpretation; Systematic interpretation looks at the context of a norm; hence, it involves an investigation into the relations between the norm to be applied and other relevant norms and codes of the same legal system. This mode of interpretation serves the interests of consistency and coherence of the legal system as a whole. The systematic interpretation is a significant canon of construction in the civil law tradition. The correct answer is D.

Objective-teleological interpretation: This form of teleological interpretation requires an inquiry with respect to the sense and purpose of the norm to be applied. It is about the reasonable goals and policy considerations behind the norm to be applied.74 It is about ratio legis of the norm. The ratio or telos is actually the reason for the being of any norm. The correct answer is C.

Case law also plays a significant role in civil law jurisdictions. Thus being so, they do not enjoy the binding force as their common law counterparts do. The question is then to what extent cases in civil law are treated as authoritative. Exceptional cases put aside, as a rule, the case law in civil law is not treated as authoritative. Nonetheless, in most cases, lower courts do follow superior courts’ decisions. The following reasons may be pointed out for this phenomenon:

• most of codes formulated in the nineteenth century, say French Civil Code, could not possibly envisage developments in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries. Therefore, where there has been a gap in the law that is not covered by the codes, judges are required to consider whether to indulge in some sort of ‘law-making’ or law-creating process.

• it promotes certainty and predictability in law;

• it has been regarded as a means of promoting equality of justice;

• it has been deemed convenient and efficient to do so;

• judges do not like being reversed or overturned on appeal;

• as members of hierarchy with a tradition, the practice of following cases has been viewed as a form of judicial co-operation. 

The correct answer is C.

Historical Interpretation or Legislative Intent; Historical (genetic) interpretation is an inquiry into the meaning of legal terms as intended by the historical legislator. This method requires an investigation into the purposes the legislator pursued by enacting the statute. Historical interpretation is about the legislator’s actual intention. The correct answer is B.

Deduction means reasoning that moves from general premises, which are known or presumed to be known, to certain conclusions. Induction, by contrast, is reasoning that moves from specific cases to more general, but uncertain, conclusions. The correct answer is B.

Deduction means reasoning that moves from general premises, which are known or presumed to be known, to certain conclusions. Induction, by contrast, is reasoning that moves from specific cases to more general, but uncertain, conclusions. The correct answer is B. The correct answer is A.

Justification- since judges are required to state the grounds for their decisions, they must expound them in an open manner. Once again, the syllogism provides the courts with an ideal mechanism for justifying what they do. To the party losing a case, it shows in a most objective and straightforward way that the judgment has been given in conformity with the law and is nothing other than a straightforward deduction from the principles of this law. Similarly, the syllogism with its function of justification allows the Court of Cassation to which a case has been referred to exercise control over the correct application of the rule of law by the lower courts.

The correct answer is A.