INTERPRETATIVE ARGUMENTATION AND EQUITABLE ARGUMENTATION. AGAINST THE JUDICIAL CREATIONISM

Abstract

The article deals with the theory of argumentation as an epistemological dimension of law, considering judicial reasoning as a mainly cognitive activity which combines probative, interpretative, and equitable argumentation. From this point, it assesses the conceptions of law which assume that judiciary can create law and also vindicate the overcoming of the rule of law. The paper focuses on those argumentation dimensions which have an increasing relevance in the legal interpretation providing an appropriate support to submission of judges to the rule of law