CQUniversity
Browse

File(s) not publicly available

Interpretation is understanding and application : the case for concurrent legal interpretation

journal contribution
posted on 2017-12-06, 00:00 authored by Christopher Walshaw
There is growing acceptance in law that meaning is found in application to particular facts and not in advance of application. I call these two accounts of interpretation concurrent interpretation and prospective interpretation, respectively, and, in a discussion of philosophical arguments, explain why interpretation is concurrent interpretation. These arguments also contain valuable guidance on methods of interpretation specifically relevant to the interpretation of legal texts. The case for concurrent interpretation presents a direct challenge to originalists. Therefore, the opportunity is taken to examine closely and challenge the intentionalist thesis propounded by Stanley Fish and others, as a counterpoint to the case for concurrent interpretation.

Funding

Category 1 - Australian Competitive Grants (this includes ARC, NHMRC)

History

Volume

34

Issue

2

Start Page

101

End Page

127

Number of Pages

27

eISSN

1464-3863

ISSN

0144-3593

Location

Oxford

Publisher

Oxford University Press

Language

en-aus

Peer Reviewed

  • No

Open Access

  • No

Era Eligible

  • No

Journal

Statute law review.

Usage metrics

    CQUniversity

    Exports

    RefWorks
    BibTeX
    Ref. manager
    Endnote
    DataCite
    NLM
    DC