Academic Year:
2020/21
421 - Degree in Law
27735 - Legal Interpretation and Argument
Teaching Plan Information
Academic Year:
2020/21
Subject:
27735 - Legal Interpretation and Argument
Faculty / School:
102 - Facultad de Derecho
Degree:
421 - Degree in Law
ECTS:
3.0
Year:
4
Semester:
Second semester
Subject Type:
Optional
Module:
---
1.1. Aims of the course
This course offers a both theoretical and practical introduction to the main interpretation and argumentation problems faced by courts when applying the law. The course pursues a twofold objective, namely: to strengthen students’ ability to critically analyse the justification of judicial decisions, and to make students exercise and improve their own legal argumentation skills, particularly as regards statutory and constitutional construction and evidential reasoning.
1.2. Context and importance of this course in the degree
Seven (out of thirteen) specific competences or skills underlying the degree programme in law are directly related to legal interpretation and argumentation, and three of them even include an explicit mention of the ability to interpret and apply the law and to elaborate legal arguments. Being the only course in the law curriculum which is entirely devoted to the learning and practising of these competences, Legal Interpretation and Argumentation may well be seen as a cross-cutting learning opportunity: not only does it reinforce the skills that students have previously acquired throughout the degree programme, especially in the so-called dogmatic subjects, but also provides a useful methodological and practical training for any (future) lawyer.
1.3. Recommendations to take this course
No specific theoretical background in legal interpretation and argumentation is required to successfully complete this course. Active involvement during the class greatly contributes to achieving the learning goals – and hence a good final mark.
2.1. Competences
Amongst the basic competences (bC) and the specific competences (sC) that undergraduate law students are expected to attain, this course helps to consolidate the following:
[bC2] to know how to apply theoretical knowledge to professional practice, and how to elaborate arguments and solve problems within a given area of study;
[bC4] be capable of conveying information, ideas, problems and solutions to both expert and non-expert audiences;
[bC5] to develop those skills which are needed to carry out subsequent study programmes with a high level of autonomy;
[sC2] to identify and apply constitutional principles and values when it comes to interpreting the legal order;
[sC3] to analyse normative (legal) structures;
[sC4] to apply legal rules and principles in concrete cases, and to solve these cases according to acceptable patterns of legal methodology;
[sC5] to construe legal texts from an interdisciplinary perspective and in the light of relevant legal, ethical and deontological principles or values;
[sC7] to develop, both orally and in written, plausible legal arguments;
[sC9] to analyse the legal order in a critical, original and innovative way;
[sC10/11] to retrieve and adequately handle legislative information, case law and doctrinal or scholarly resources; and
[sC12] to properly organise and plan one’s own learning activities, and to be proficient in team working.
2.2. Learning goals
After completing this course, students shall have a sufficient capacity…
[G1] to explain, interrelate and apply basic theoretical notions of legal interpretation and argumentation, as well as to identify and compare the methodological implications of different conceptions of law;
[G2] to justify and evaluate interpretations of legal texts, and to correctly utilise typical interpretative arguments and hermeneutical criteria under Spanish law;
[G3] to critically review and to properly perform subsumptions, analogies and proportionality analyses (including balancing) in real or hypothetical scenarios;
[G4] to evaluate the cogency of an evidential reasoning as delivered by a court, and to state the reasons why a given set of alleged facts should, or should not, be held to be proved;
[G5] to reconstruct a judicial argumentation, and to visually represent its structure and content; and
[G6] to elaborate a plausible argumentation to justify a decision (or an interpretative stance) in view of a case, and to explain and defend this argumentation, orally or in written.
2.3. Importance of learning goals
The course focus is on the forensic context, and may hence be most interesting to students who want to become judges, prosecutors, barristers, or solicitors. Yet, the tasks of interpreting legal materials and legally relevant facts, and of arguing about this interpretation, inhere any branch of the legal profession, so the above learning goals are likewise relevant in other contexts (legal academy, public administration, legislative bodies…).
3. Assessment (1st and 2nd call)
3.1. Assessment tasks (description of tasks, marking system and assessment criteria)
To complete this course, students have to obtain a pass in both the general and the applied part (50% of the course mark, i.e. up to 5 points, is accorded to each part). As for the general part of the course, students’ achievement is assessed through a final, written exam at the end of the term. To pass the applied part of the course, students may opt either for a continuous assessment model based on periodic assignments or for taking a problem or case-based exam at the end of the term.
3.1.1. Mixed model: periodic assignments (continuous assessment) plus final exam
The applied part of the course may be completed through the continuous assessment model (periodic assignments). To benefit from this model, students are required to attend all practice sessions (one session may be missed, though, with a written serious excuse); to submit all planned assignments on time; and to obtain an average mark of at least 2.5 points in the assignments. Consistent and thoughtful participation in class discussions may add up to 2.5 points to this mark. Besides passing the applied part of the course, under this model students must take a written exam to show their knowledge about – and their ability in interrelating and exemplifying – the topics covered during the semester (the exam may include essay-type questions). A minimum mark of 2.5 points is needed to obtain a pass in this part. Further details on the design of the exam, on how to prepare it, and on the assessment criteria will be announced at the beginning of the term.
3.1.2. Final assessment model
Students who cannot, o do not want to, follow the mixed assessment model are given the option to pass the course by taking two final exams at the end of the term, covering both the general and the applied part of the course. The general or theoretical exam is the same as in the mixed model. To pass the applied part of course, students must take a second, problem or case-based exam – this option holds as well for students who have not obtained the minimum requisite grade in the assignments. Further details on the design of this exam, on how to prepare it, and on the assessment criteria will be announced at the beginning of the term.
3.2. Marks/Grades
Course marks range from 0 to 10 (one decimal place is allowed), with a mark below 5 being a fail. Numerical marks correlate with the following non-numerical marks:
[0 to 4,9] Fail (suspenso): the student has not sufficiently achieved the learning goals.
[5,0 to 6,9] Pass (aprobado): the student has sufficiently (or slightly more than sufficiently) achieved the learning goals.
[7,0 to 8,9] Good, very good (notable): the student has achieved the learning goals far more than sufficiently, or has achieved them to a great extent.
[9 to 10] Outstanding (sobresaliente): the student has brilliantly achieved the learning goals.
An honors distinction (matrícula de honor) will be given to students who obtain a grade above 9.5 points – note, however, that academic regulations do limit the number of honors per course.
4. Methodology, learning tasks, syllabus and resources
4.1. Methodological overview
The teaching/learning process designed for this course consists of theory-practice sessions (4.2.1), periodic assignments and practice sessions (4.2.2), and autonomous work and study (4.2.3).
4.2. Learning tasks
4.2.1. Theory-Practice Sessions
Method: “theory session” (explanation and discussion of theoretical topics), combined with interactive teaching and classwork
Large group (0.6 ECTS)
Competences/Skills: Cb2, Cb4, Ce2, Ce3, Ce5, Ce9
Learning goals: G1, G2, G3, G4
4.2.2. Periodic assignments and Practice Sessions
Method: “practice session”, case method, problem-based learning, simulation
Small group (0.4 ECTS) and work outside the classroom (1.1 ECTS)
Competences/Skills: Cb2, Cb4, Cb5, Ce3, Ce4, Ce5, Ce7, Ce9, Ce10/11, Ce12
Learning goals: G1, G2, G3, G4, G5, G6
4.2.3. Autonomous Work and Exam Preparation
Method: autonomous work, tutorials (0.8 ECTS, or 2.9 ECTS for those who follow the course only through the course online platform), final written exam (0.1 ECTS)
Competences/Skills: Cb2, Cb4, Ce3, Ce4, Ce5, Ce7, Ce9, Ce12
Learning goals: G1, G2, G3, G4, G5, G6
4.3. Syllabus
The following topics will be addressed during the semester:
[1] Theoretical foundations of legal interpretation and argumentation.
[2] Legal argumentation about facts and evidential reasoning.
[3] Recurrent problems in interpreting and applying rules.
[4] Constitutional interpretation. Proportionality and balancing.
4.4. Course planning and calendar
Further information on this course (timetable, classroom, office hours, examination dates and other details) will be provided on the first day of class and announced on the Faculty of Law website [derecho.unizar.es].
4.5. Bibliography and recommended resources
All learning materials, readings and resources for each unit will be made available on the course virtual platform [add.unizar.es] or handed out in class. The suggested general bibliography includes these books:
M. Atienza, Curso de argumentación jurídica, Madrid: Trotta, 2013.
http://roble.unizar.es/record=b1666781~S1*spi
J.A. García Amado, Razonamiento jurídico y argumentación, León: Leolas, 2020 (2nd ed.).
http://roble.unizar.es/record=b2034318~S1*spi
M. Gascón (ed.), Argumentación jurídica, Valencia: Tirant lo Blanch, 2014.
http://roble.unizar.es/record=b1708394~S1*spi
R. Guastini, Interpretar y argumentar, Madrid: CEPC, 2014.
http://roble.unizar.es/record=b1803184~S1*spi