Encyclopedia of the Philosophy of Law and Social Philosophy

Living Edition
| Editors: Mortimer Sellers, Stephan Kirste

Alexy’s Theory of Rules and Principles

  • David DuarteEmail author
Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6730-0_380-2

Introduction

Notwithstanding a mere classification of norms, in its plainest and initial understanding, Alexy’s distinction between rules and principles is the cornerstone of a systematic comprehension of law, encompassing multiple and diversified assertions that compound what might be qualified as a complete theory of law. As the starting point of the principles theory, Alexy’s contraposition between rules and principles has implications in various legal fields, such as, and just naming a few, the theory of norms, the role of proportionality, the methodological operations in the application of law, or the theory of rights. If one takes into account the new framework created in legal science, its large scope, the amount of research made underneath, and its diffusion, Alexy’s principles theory can even be seen as a paradigm shift in legal science.

The Opening Criterion of Distinction

Alexy’s distinction between rules and principles is based, at a first level, on a criterion regarding...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Aarnio A (1997) Las Reglas en Serio. La Normatividad del Derecho. Gedisa, Barcelona, pp 17–36Google Scholar
  2. Alexy R (2000) On the structure of legal principles. Ratio Juris 13:294–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alexy R (2002) Theory of constitutional rights. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  4. Alexy R (2003a) On balancing and Subsumption. A structural comparison. Ratio Juris 16:433–449CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Alexy R (2003b) Constitutional rights, balancing, and rationality. Ratio Juris 16:131–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Alexy R (2003c) Sobre la Estructura de los Principios Jurídicos. Tres Escritos Sobre los Derechos Fundamentales y la Teoría de los Principios. Universidad Externado de Colombia, Bogotá, pp 93–137Google Scholar
  7. Alexy, Robert 2011. Deber ideal. Derechos Fundamentales, Principios y Fundamentación: Estudios sobre la Teoria Jurídica de Robert Alexy. Coordinación de Laura Clérico, Jan Sieckmann, Daniel Oliver Lalana. Granada: Comores. 15–36.Google Scholar
  8. Alexy R (2014) Formal principles: some replies to critics. Int J Constit Law 12(3):511–524CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Alexy R (2016) Constitutional rights and constitutional review. In: Himma K, Spaic B (eds) Fundamental rights justification and interpretation. Eleven International Publishing, Den Haag, pp 63–74Google Scholar
  10. Alonso JP (2016) The logical structure of principles in Alexy’s theory. Rev J Constit Theory Philos Law 28:53–61Google Scholar
  11. Bäcker C (2011) Regras, Princípios e Derrotabilidade. Rev Bras Estud Polít 102:55–82Google Scholar
  12. Brożek B (2012) Legal rules and principles: a theory revisited. i-Lex, Rivista di Scienze Giuridiche, Scienze Cognitive ed Intelligenza Artificiale 17:205–226Google Scholar
  13. Jestaedt M (2012) The doctrine of balancing, its strengths and weaknesses. In: Klatt M (ed) Institutionalized reason. The jurisprudence of Robert Alexy. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 152–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Klatt M (2012) Robert Alexy’s philosophy of law as a system. In: Klatt M (ed) Institutionalized reason. The jurisprudence of Robert Alexy. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 1–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Pino G (2016) Teoria Analítica del Diritto I. La Norma Jurídica. Edizione ETS, PisaGoogle Scholar
  16. Pulido, Carlos Bernal 2006. On Alexy’s weight formula. Arguing fundamental rights. Agustín Menéndez José Eriksen and Erik Eriksen. New York: Springer. 101–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Sieckmann J (2010) Balancing, optimisation, and Alexy’s “weight formula”. In: Sieckmann JR (ed) Legal reasoning: the methods of balancing. Franz Steiner Verlag, Stuttgart, pp 101–118Google Scholar
  18. Sieckmann J (2011) Los Derechos Fundamentales como Princípios. La Teoria Principialista de los Derechos Fundamentales. Edición de Jan Sieckmann. Marcial Pons, Madrid, pp 27–70Google Scholar
  19. Verheij B, Hage J, van den Herik J (1998) An integrated view on rules and principles. Artif Intell Law 6:3–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Wang P-H (2010) Principles as ideal ought. Some semantic considerations on the logical structure of principles. In: Sieckmann J (ed) Legal reasoning: the methods of balancing. Franz Steiner Verlag, Stuttgart, pp 29–50Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of LisbonLisbonPortugal

Section editors and affiliations

  • Miodrag Jovanovic
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Theory, Sociology and Philosophy of LawUniversity of Belgrade, Faculty of LawBelgradeSerbia