Question and answer
what is the policy consideration behind the relevant rule?
‘“Policy”’ has become a hideously inexact word in legal discourse' (Neil MacCormick, Legal Reasoning and Legal Theory (1978)). In this respect, ‘policy’ is not unlike ‘values’. [ Each term is used from time to time in an all-embracing sense so as to include the other. The expression ‘policy considerations’ is generally reserved in the law for arguments or factors of a non-ethical kind, ‘values’
being a term used often to denote ethical values, though its use is by no means always so confined. Policy considerations may become relevant to the making of a judicial decision when the decision cannot be made by reference to established rules, whether grounded in precedent or even in statute. The Court will then consider the values and policy arguments that are relevant to the articulation of the potential rule (or principle). The Court must make an evaluation of them as a preliminary to articulating the rule to be applied in the instant case. The rule will have an application that extends beyond the parties to the case. Just how far it will extend depends upon its terms, its nature, and subject matter. In this context, policy arguments come into play as the rule to be adopted is shaped and evaluated by reference to its effect in producing a desirable state of affairs. A policy argument is not used to reach a decision in a particular case dissociated from the general rule to be applied, except in cases where the Court is exercising a statutory judicial discretion requiring the Court to take into account certain policy considerations. Even in such a case, a court will endeavour to deal with them in a principled way. As United States Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes observed in 1881, ‘every important principle which is developed by litigation is in fact and at bottom the result of more or less definitely understood views of public policy’. In this passage, Holmes was equating ‘public policy’ to ‘public interest’. He was not referring to public policy in its technical sense—for example, as a ground for rejecting evidence (Ridgeway v The Queen (1995)) or for invalidating contracts. ]
Get an answer
Original conversation
User: what is the policy consideration behind the relevant rule?

Weegy: ‘“Policy”’ has become a hideously inexact word in legal discourse' (Neil MacCormick, Legal Reasoning and Legal Theory (1978)). In this respect, ‘policy’ is not unlike ‘values’. [ Each term is used from time to time in an all-embracing sense so as to include the other. The expression ‘policy considerations’ is generally reserved in the law for arguments or factors of a non-ethical kind, ‘values’ being a term used often to denote ethical values, though its use is by no means always so confined. Policy considerations may become relevant to the making of a judicial decision when the decision cannot be made by reference to established rules, whether grounded in precedent or even in statute. The Court will then consider the values and policy arguments that are relevant to the articulation of the potential rule (or principle). The Court must make an evaluation of them as a preliminary to articulating the rule to be applied in the instant case. The rule will have an application that extends beyond the parties to the case. Just how far it will extend depends upon its terms, its nature, and subject matter. In this context, policy arguments come into play as the rule to be adopted is shaped and evaluated by reference to its effect in producing a desirable state of affairs. A policy argument is not used to reach a decision in a particular case dissociated from the general rule to be applied, except in cases where the Court is exercising a statutory judicial discretion requiring the Court to take into account certain policy considerations. Even in such a case, a court will endeavour to deal with them in a principled way. As United States Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes observed in 1881, ‘every important principle which is developed by litigation is in fact and at bottom the result of more or less definitely understood views of public policy’. In this passage, Holmes was equating ‘public policy’ to ‘public interest’. He was not referring to public policy in its technical sense—for example, as a ground for rejecting evidence (Ridgeway v The Queen (1995)) or for invalidating contracts. ]
Expert answered|Neon Aloo|Points 133|

User: what does relevant rule mean?

Question|Rated good
Asked 8/4/2011 10:18:33 AM
0 Answers/Comments
New answers
Rating

There are no new answers.

Comments

There are no comments.

Add an answer or comment
Log in or sign up first.
17,955,036 questions answered
Popular Conversations
Solve for x. -5x + 12x - 8x = -24
Weegy: Add -5, 12, and -8 to get -1. So -1x=-24. Thus x=24 User: Choose the answer based on the most efficient ...
10/23/2014 12:33:39 AM| 2 Answers
Who was the poet who wrote The Faerie Queene? A. Francis ...
Weegy: Edmund Spenser was the poet who wrote The Faerie Queene.
10/23/2014 1:19:01 AM| 2 Answers
Emily Dickinson's poem "Success" is ironic because the idea of losers ...
Weegy: True User: Poems compact meaning and make unexpected associations. True False
10/23/2014 6:26:33 AM| 2 Answers
What percent of 115 is 29.9
Weegy: What percent of 115 is 29.9? is 26% User: What percent of 22 is 44 Weegy: The 44% of 175 is: Convert 44% in ...
10/23/2014 7:20:21 AM| 2 Answers
Multiply the following fractions. Reduce your answer to lowest terms. ...
Weegy: 12/35 User: multiply and reduce 1 7/10 x 3/4 Weegy: 5/12
10/23/2014 8:49:48 AM| 2 Answers
The phrase "to jump" is an example of a ...
Weegy: This is True. User: A main clause that can stand alone or function as a whole sentence is a(n) ...
10/23/2014 9:12:57 AM| 2 Answers
The right to privacy inherent in the concept of due process has been ...
Weegy: The right to privacy inherent in the concept of due process has been applied with the most controversy recently ...
10/23/2014 10:16:22 AM| 2 Answers
Weegy Stuff
S
L
1
1
1
1
L
1
L
Points 2497 [Total 14872]| Ratings 0| Comments 2497| Invitations 0|Offline
S
L
1
L
P
C
1
P
C
1
L
Points 1594 [Total 11075]| Ratings 4| Comments 1554| Invitations 0|Offline
S
1
L
1
L
P
P
L
Points 864 [Total 13093]| Ratings 0| Comments 864| Invitations 0|Offline
S
L
Points 585 [Total 1984]| Ratings 0| Comments 585| Invitations 0|Offline
S
1
L
L
Points 505 [Total 6299]| Ratings 3| Comments 475| Invitations 0|Online
S
Points 482 [Total 482]| Ratings 0| Comments 452| Invitations 3|Offline
S
Points 444 [Total 445]| Ratings 6| Comments 384| Invitations 0|Offline
S
Points 277 [Total 277]| Ratings 1| Comments 267| Invitations 0|Offline
S
P
C
L
P
L
1
Points 48 [Total 6282]| Ratings 0| Comments 48| Invitations 0|Offline
S
Points 27 [Total 27]| Ratings 0| Comments 27| Invitations 0|Offline
Home | Contact | Blog | About | Terms | Privacy | Social | ©2014 Purple Inc.