caa a22 4500 46574379X CHVBK 20180323111814.0 cr unu---uuuuu 170327e19900201xx s 000 0 eng 10.1007/BF01130269 doi (NATIONALLICENCE)springer-10.1007/BF01130269 van den Hoven Paul University of Utrecht, the Netherlands aut Clear cases, do they exist? [Elektronische Daten] [Paul van den Hoven] Conclusion: What I sought to demonstrate was that the relations between (a) how a case fits into the system, (b) what the main structure of the justification is, and (c) whether discretionary authority is used, are not as simple as suggested in the literature. What we saw is that if the justification for a decision in a particular case is a practical syllogism with an established legal rule as its major premiss, there are many possibilities: (a) the case did or did not raise a conflict for the judge between his intuitions about reasonableness and his interpretation of the legal system; (b) the case had or had not a clear solution in conformity with the legal system; (c) the case was or was not decided according to what the system seemed to prescribe. Therefore, the main structure of a justification cannot inform us about questions as: Did the case fit into the system? Is discretionary authority used? The opposition between hard cases and clear cases is much too complex to be of any use to clarify such issues. Deborah Charles Publications, 1990 Revue internationale de semiotique juridique Kluwer Academic Publishers 3/1(1990-02-01), 55-63 0952-8059 3:1<55 1990 3 11196 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01130269 text/html Onlinezugriff via DOI 1 research-article jats NATIONALLICENCE 856 40 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01130269 text/html Onlinezugriff via DOI NATIONALLICENCE 100 1- van den Hoven Paul University of Utrecht, the Netherlands aut NATIONALLICENCE 773 0- Revue internationale de semiotique juridique Kluwer Academic Publishers 3/1(1990-02-01), 55-63 0952-8059 3:1<55 1990 3 11196 Metadata rights reserved Springer special CC-BY-NC licence nationallicence BK010053 XK010053 XK010000 NATIONALLICENCE NATIONALLICENCE NL-springer