This is a summary of a fictitious case created in Lon L Fuller, ‘The Case of the. Speluncean Explorers’ () 62(4) Harvard Law Review The case takes. 1 Lon L Fuller, `The Case of the Speluncean Explorers’ 2 See, eg, Jordi Ferrer Beltr n and Giovanni Battista Ratti (eds), The Logic of Legal Requirements. Abstract: Lon L. Fuller’s The Case of the Speluncean Explorers is a classic in jurisprudence. The case presents five judicial opinions which clash with each other.
|Genre:||Health and Food|
|Published (Last):||1 April 2013|
|PDF File Size:||10.5 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||18.51 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Two other judges overturn the convictions; one focuses on “common od and the popular will while the other uses arguments drawn from the natural law tradition, emphasizing the purposive approach. He draws analogies to servants who need to “read between the lines” of their masters’ instructions; strict literal compliance may not always be the actual intention. They then consult with medical experts, who inform them that they are unlikely to survive to the rescue rhe the likelihood of starvation.
Retrieved 15 January Twentieth-Century Statutory Interpretation in a Nutshell”.
Defendants were in a “state of nature” so Newgarth’s normal laws did not apply to them; the laws of nature would allow them to agree to sacrifice one’s life to save the other four If the laws of Newgarth do apply, thd a purposive approach must be taken to the statute.
Describing a case of trapped travellers who are forcd to cannibalize one of their team, it is used on courses in philosophy of law and Jurisprudence to show how their trial upon rescue touches on key concepts in philosophy and legal theory such as utilitarianism and naturalism. Douwe Korff – unknown.
The Case of the Speluncean Explorers
Democratic Jurisprudence and Judicial Review: It doesn’t tell you what to think, but illustrates the contending positions and lets you think for yourself. Xeplorers one outside the cave is willing to answer this question. Before the dice are cast, Whetmore allegedly expresses a wish to withdraw from the arrangement, preferring to wait another week “before embracing an expedient so frightful and odious”.
Radio contact is subsequently lost. They learn via intermittent radio contact that, without food, they are likely to expoorers to death before they can be rescued.
The Harvard Law Review Association. Once the cave-in is cleared, it is discovered that only four cavers have survived; Roger Whetmore had been killed and eaten by the others. Sign in to use this feature.
Peter Suber, The Case of the Speluncean Explorers: Nine New Opinions – PhilPapers
wpeluncean Criticises Foster J’s approach The natural law under the posited “state of nature” prioritises freedom of contract above the right to life Purposive approach to statutory interpretation is difficult when there are multiple purposes here, retribution and rehabilitation Cannot decide case due to competing legal rationales and emotions.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. James Allan – Jasperson – – International Journal of Applied Philosophy 23 2: Legal Positivism in Philosophy apeluncean Law. Wikipedia articles needing clarification from March The exlporers is an enjoyable and even-handed way to understand what the debate is about.
In contrast to the other judges, Justice Handy prefers to use a “pragmatic, common-sense approach”, rather than abstract legal theories, to resolve the case. Fuller first published in the Harvard Law Review in The relevant statute provides that “Whoever shall willfully take the life of another shall be punished by death”, offering no exceptions which would be relevant to the case.
They decide to engage in cannibalismand select one of their number to be killed and eaten so that the others may survive. Added to PP index Total downloads 54, of 2, Recent downloads 6 months 21 21, of 2, How can I increase my downloads?
Views Read Edit View history. The cavers are ultimately convicted of murder. The mandatory sentence for murder in Newgarth is death by hanging. As its main purpose is deterrence, the judge concluded that, just as with a case of self-defence, the purpose of the statute would not be served by upholding the convictions. In determining that the convictions should be overturned, Justice Foster makes two main points. He is subsequently killed and eaten.
The Case of the Speluncean Explorers – Wikipedia
Natural Law Theory in Philosophy of Law. Realism about Legal Reasoning in Philosophy of Law. As the Court’s decision is a tie, the original convictions are upheld and the men are sentenced to death. These opinions include perspectives from communitarian, feminist, multicultural, postmodern and economic theories of law, updating Fuller’s original case and bringing contemporary theories of law to bear on the five original opinions.
Strategies of Judicial Review. I believe something more is on trial in this case than the fate of these unfortunate explorers; that is the law of our Commonwealth. These combined objections lead Justice Tatting to reject Justice Foster’s reasoning as “intellectually unsound and approaching mere rationalization. Criticises Chief Justice’s proposed appeal to Executive for clemency given need to respect separation of powers ; should only make appeal in capacity as private citizens Moral considerations are irrelevant in applying the statute.
Google Books no proxy legacy.
The first opinion is largely expository ; caae is used to recount the facts of the case. This would allow justice to be achieved “without impairing either the letter or spirit of our statutes and without offering any encouragement for the disregard of law”. The Chief Justice states that the statute is unambiguous, with no applicable legal defences, so it must be applied by the court.
The facts of the case edplorers recounted in the first judicial opinion, which is given by Chief Justice Truepenny.