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.
17,893,320 questions answered
Popular Conversations
3x+3/18x= User: 10x+3/=
Weegy: this is quite simple, if you read over the question a few times and learn the tendencies. One number is ten ...
10/20/2014 5:27:08 PM| 5 Answers
Choose the product. -7p3(4p2 + 3p - 1)
Weegy: -7p3(4p2 3p - 1) = 7p3 - 84p6. Source: User: Find the quotient. 42j4k2 ÷ (-3j3k) Weegy: = 42j k /- 3j k) = ...
10/19/2014 5:43:50 PM| 3 Answers
Describe the key differences between managing and leading.
Weegy: ]
10/19/2014 5:51:01 PM| 3 Answers
Find the sum and choose the correct answer. 2n3 + 4n2 - 7 and -n3 + ...
Weegy: (2 n^3+4 n^2-7)+(-n^3+8 n-9) your answer is n^3+4 n^2+8 n-16 User: Select the correct difference. -3z7 - ...
10/19/2014 5:41:21 PM| 2 Answers
Weegy Stuff
S
L
1
1
1
1
L
1
L
Points 2160 [Total 14535]| Ratings 0| Comments 2160| Invitations 0|Offline
S
L
1
L
P
C
1
P
C
1
L
Points 1393 [Total 10874]| Ratings 3| Comments 1363| Invitations 0|Offline
S
1
L
1
L
P
P
L
Points 745 [Total 12974]| Ratings 0| Comments 745| Invitations 0|Offline
S
L
Points 449 [Total 1848]| Ratings 0| Comments 449| Invitations 0|Offline
S
1
L
L
Points 447 [Total 6241]| Ratings 3| Comments 417| Invitations 0|Offline
S
Points 401 [Total 401]| Ratings 0| Comments 371| Invitations 3|Offline
S
Points 297 [Total 298]| Ratings 3| Comments 267| Invitations 0|Offline
S
Points 180 [Total 180]| Ratings 1| Comments 170| 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.