ScholarGate
Asistents

Salīdzināt metodes

Apskatiet izvēlētās metodes blakus; rindas, kas atšķiras, ir izceltas.

Salīdzinošā doktrinārā tiesību pētniecība×Doktrinālā tiesību pētniecība×
NozareLauka metodesLauka metodes
SaimeProcess / pipelineProcess / pipeline
Izcelsmes gads19th century origins; modern systematic form 1960s–199819th century (systematised ~1860s–1880s in common law jurisdictions)
AutorsRooted in classical comparative law (Anselm von Feuerbach, early 19th c.); systematised by Zweigert & Kötz (1998)Common law tradition; systematised by jurists such as A.V. Dicey and John Austin
TipsQualitative legal research designLegal-analytical research method
PirmavotsZweigert, K., & Kötz, H. (1998). An Introduction to Comparative Law (3rd ed., T. Weir, Trans.). Oxford University Press. ISBN: 978-0198268598Hutchinson, T. (2013). Researching and Writing in Law (3rd ed.). Thomson Reuters. ISBN: 9780455229829
Citi nosaukumicomparative-doctrinal method, cross-jurisdictional doctrinal analysis, comparative black-letter law research, CDLRblack-letter law research, legal doctrine analysis, analytical jurisprudence, traditional legal scholarship
Saistītās66
KopsavilkumsComparative doctrinal legal research systematically identifies, expounds, and compares the legal rules, principles, and doctrines governing the same problem across two or more jurisdictions. It combines the internal rigour of doctrinal analysis — mapping the authoritative sources of a single legal system — with the external perspective of comparative law, asking whether different legal systems solve the same social problem in similar or divergent ways and why.Doctrinal legal research is the foundational methodology of legal scholarship. It systematically identifies, reads, and analyses authoritative legal sources — statutes, case law, constitutional texts, and regulations — to describe, explain, and critique the content and internal logic of legal doctrine. By working within the accepted hierarchy of legal sources, it answers the question 'What is the law?' with analytical rigour and interpretive precision, producing descriptions of settled doctrine and arguments for how ambiguities should be resolved.
ScholarGateDatu kopa
  1. v1
  2. 2 Avoti
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 2 Avoti
  3. PUBLISHED

Doties uz meklēšanu Lejupielādēt slaidus

ScholarGateSalīdzināt metodes: Comparative Doctrinal Legal Research · Doctrinal Legal Research. Izgūts 2026-06-20 no https://scholargate.app/lv/compare