Legal doctrine

Last updated

A legal doctrine is a framework, set of rules, procedural steps, or test, often established through precedent in the common law, through which judgments can be determined in a given legal case. For example, a doctrine comes about when a judge makes a ruling where a process is outlined and applied, and allows for it to be equally applied to like cases. When enough judges make use of the process, it may become established as the de facto method of deciding like situations.

Contents

Examples

Examples of legal doctrines include:

DoctrineDefinition and use
Faithless servant Under the laws of a number of states in the United States, and most notably New York State law, an employee who acts unfaithfully towards his employer must forfeit all of the compensation he received during the period of his disloyalty. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] It is a very old common law doctrine that springs out of agency law. [6] [7] [2] [8]
Fundamental breach , also known as fundamental term or repudiatory breachUnder English common law, performance may be held to be so substandard that the party injured by the breach is to be exonerated from the performance even if the contract specifically requires performance in the face of a breach. [9] It is an extension of the doctrine of deviation.[ citation needed ]
Laches Under English common law, a court may refuse to hear a case not brought before it after a lengthy period since the right of action arose. The doctrine of laches is intended to prevent injustice to the defendant because of the plaintiff reserving action for the time most convenient or advantageous for them.
Substantial performance A rule of equity in which, by contrast to fundamental breach, a contract that is substantially performed before a breach occurs may still be upheld to the benefit of the defendant. It is used by courts to prevent the injured party from taking unfair advantage of the party that breached after a portion of the contract has been performed. [9]
Attribution A series of doctrines (such as vicarious liability and common purpose) allowing an actor to be held liable for actions he did not actually commit.
Tipsy Coachman A principle of appellate law that allows an appellate court to affirm a trial court that reaches the right result but for the wrong reasons, so long as there is any basis which would support the judgment in the record.

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Black-letter law</span> Well-established legal rules that are no longer subject to reasonable dispute

In common law legal systems, black-letter law refers to well-established legal rules that are no longer subject to reasonable dispute. Black-letter law can be contrasted with legal theory or unsettled legal issues.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Common law</span> Law created by judicial precedent

In law, common law is the body of law created by judges and similar quasi-judicial tribunals by virtue of being stated in written opinions.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Constitutional law</span> An area of law that deals with interpretation and implementation of the Constitution

Constitutional law is a body of law which defines the role, powers, and structure of different entities within a state, namely, the executive, the parliament or legislature, and the judiciary; as well as the basic rights of citizens and, in federal countries such as the United States and Canada, the relationship between the central government and state, provincial, or territorial governments.

Precedent is a principle or rule established in a legal case that becomes authoritative to a court or other tribunal when deciding subsequent cases with similar legal issues or facts. The legal doctrine stating that courts should follow precedent is called stare decisis.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">English law</span> Legal system of England and Wales

English law is the common law legal system of England and Wales, comprising mainly criminal law and civil law, each branch having its own courts and procedures.

Case law, also used interchangeably with common law, is a law that is based on precedents, that is the judicial decisions from previous cases, rather than law based on constitutions, statutes, or regulations. Case law uses the detailed facts of a legal case that have been resolved by courts or similar tribunals. These past decisions are called "case law", or precedent. Stare decisis—a Latin phrase meaning "let the decision stand"—is the principle by which judges are bound to such past decisions, drawing on established judicial authority to formulate their positions.

Legal realism is a naturalistic approach to law; it is the view that jurisprudence should emulate the methods of natural science, that is, it should rely on empirical evidence. Hypotheses must be tested against observations of the world.

Legal formalism is both a descriptive theory and a normative theory of how judges should decide cases. In its descriptive sense, formalists maintain that judges reach their decisions by applying uncontroversial principles to the facts; formalists believe that there is an underlying logic to the many legal principles that may be applied in different cases. These principles, they claim, are straightforward and can be readily discovered by anyone with some legal expertise. Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., by contrast, believed that "The life of the law has not been logic: it has been experience". The formalist era is generally viewed as having existed from the 1870s to the 1920s, but some scholars deny that legal formalism ever existed in practice.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Originalism</span> Constitutional interpretation doctrine

Originalism is a method of constitutional and statutory interpretation. Originalists assert that legal text should be interpreted based on the original understanding at the time of adoption. Originalists object to the idea of the significant legal evolution being driven by judges in a common law framework and instead favor modifications of laws through the Legislature or through Constitutional amendment.

Respondeat superior is a doctrine that a party is responsible for acts of his agents. For example, in the United States, there are circumstances when an employer is liable for acts of employees performed within the course of their employment. This rule is also called the master-servant rule, recognized in both common law and civil law jurisdictions.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Civil law (legal system)</span> Legal system originating in continental Europe

Civil law is a legal system originating in Italy and France and has been adopted in large parts of the world. The civil law system is intellectualized within the framework of Roman law and French civil law, and with core principles codified into a referable system, which serves as the primary source of law. The civil law system is often contrasted with the common law system, which originated in medieval England. Whereas the civil law takes the form of legal codes, the common law comes from uncodified case law that arises as a result of judicial decisions, recognising prior court decisions as legally binding precedent.

In American jurisprudence, the Restatements of the Law are a set of treatises on legal subjects that seek to inform judges and lawyers about general principles of common law. There are now four series of Restatements, all published by the American Law Institute, an organization of judges, legal academics, and practitioners founded in 1923.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Cy-près doctrine</span> Court amendment of a legal document

The cy-près doctrine is a legal doctrine which allows a court to amend a legal document to enforce it "as near as possible" to the original intent of the instrument, in situations where it becomes impossible, impracticable, or illegal to enforce it under its original terms. The doctrine first arose in the English courts of equity, originating in the law of charitable trusts, but it has since been applied in the context of class action settlements in the United States.

Ratio decidendi is a Latin phrase meaning "the reason" or "the rationale for the decision". The ratio decidendi is "the point in a case that determines the judgement" or "the principle that the case establishes".

In the United States, qualified immunity is a legal principle of federal constitutional law that grants government officials performing discretionary (optional) functions immunity from lawsuits for damages unless the plaintiff shows that the official violated "clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known". It is comparable to sovereign immunity, though it protects government employees rather than the government itself. It is less strict than absolute immunity, which protects officials who "make reasonable but mistaken judgments about open legal questions", extending to "all [officials] but the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law". Qualified immunity applies only to government officials in civil litigation, and does not protect the government itself from suits arising from officials' actions.

Judicial immunity is a form of sovereign immunity, which protects judges and others employed by the judiciary from liability resulting from their judicial actions. It is intended to ensure that judges can make decisions free from improper influence exercised on them, contributing to the impartiality of the judiciary and the rule of law. In modern times, the main purpose of "judicial immunity [is to shield] judges from the suits of ordinary people", primarily litigants who may be dissatisfied with the outcome of a case decided by the judge.

Sources of law are the origins of laws, the binding rules that enable any state to govern its territory.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Law</span> System of rules and guidelines, generally backed by governmental authority

Law is a set of rules that are created and are enforceable by social or governmental institutions to regulate behavior, with its precise definition a matter of longstanding debate. It has been variously described as a science and as the art of justice. State-enforced laws can be made by a group legislature or by a single legislator, resulting in statutes; by the executive through decrees and regulations; or established by judges through precedent, usually in common law jurisdictions. Private individuals may create legally binding contracts, including arbitration agreements that adopt alternative ways of resolving disputes to standard court litigation. The creation of laws themselves may be influenced by a constitution, written or tacit, and the rights encoded therein. The law shapes politics, economics, history and society in various ways and also serves as a mediator of relations between people.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Law of the United States</span> Overview of the law of United States of America

The law of the United States comprises many levels of codified and uncodified forms of law, of which the most important is the nation's Constitution, which prescribes the foundation of the federal government of the United States, as well as various civil liberties. The Constitution sets out the boundaries of federal law, which consists of Acts of Congress, treaties ratified by the Senate, regulations promulgated by the executive branch, and case law originating from the federal judiciary. The United States Code is the official compilation and codification of general and permanent federal statutory law.

The faithless servant doctrine is a doctrine under the laws of a number of states in the United States, and most notably New York State law, pursuant to which employees who act unfaithfully towards their employers must forfeit to their employers all compensation received during the period of disloyalty.

References

  1. Glynn, Timothy P.; Arnow-Richman, Rachel S.; Sullivan, Charles A. (2019). Employment Law: Private Ordering and Its Limitations. Wolters Kluwer Law & Business. ISBN   9781543801064 via Google Books.
  2. 1 2 Annual Institute on Employment Law. Vol. 2. Practising Law Institute. 2004 via Google Books.
  3. New York Jurisprudence 2d. Vol. 52. West Group. 2009 via Google Books.
  4. Labor Cases. Vol. 158. Commerce Clearing House. 2009 via Google Books.
  5. Ellie Kaufman (May 19, 2018). "Met Opera sues former conductor for $5.8 million over sexual misconduct allegations". CNN.
  6. Saxe, David B.; Lesser, Danielle C. (May 29, 2018). "The Ancient Common Law Faithless Servant Rule: Still Relevant in New York". New York Law Journal.
  7. Manning Gilbert Warren III (2010). "Equitable Clawback: An Essay on Restoration of Executive Compensation". 12 University of Pennsylvania Journal of Business Law 1135.
  8. Frank J Cavico, Bahaudin G Mujtaba, Stephen Muffler. (2018). "The Duty of Loyalty in the Employment Relationship: Legal Analysis and Recommendations for Employers and Workers". Journal of Legal, Ethical and Regulatory Issues, Vol. 21, Issue 3.
  9. 1 2 Willes, John A; Willes, John H (2012). Contemporary Canadian Business Law: Principles and Cases (9th ed.). McGraw-Hill Ryerson.