Legislative intent in Law's Empire

Ratio Juris

Volumn 24, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 435-460

  Ekins, Richard ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84859628608     PISSN: 09521917     EISSN: 14679337     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9337.2011.00494.x     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Bell, John, and Engle, George. Eds. 1995. Cross on Statutory Interpretation. 3rd ed. London: Butterworths.
2. Bennion, Francis. 2008. Bennion on Statutory Interpretation. 5th ed. London: Lexis-Nexis.
3. Bratman, Michael. 1999. Faces of Intention. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
4. Brennan, Geoffrey and Pettit, Philip. 1990. Unveiling the Vote. British Journal of Political Science. 20: 311-33.
5. Dworkin, Ronald. 1986. Law's Empire. London: Fontana.
6. Easterbrook, Frank. 1983. Statutes' Domains. University of Chicago Law Review 50: 533-52.
7. Ekins, Richard. 2006. The Relevance of the Rule of Recognition. Australian Journal of Legal Philosophy 31: 95-117.
8. Ekins, Richard. 2009. The Nature of Legislative Intent. DPhil thesis: University of Oxford.
9. Ekins, Richard. 2010. The Intention of Parliament. Public Law. October: 68-85.
10. Elhauge, Einer. 2009. Statutory Default Rules: How to Interpret Unclear Legislation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
11. Finnis, John. 1980. Natural Law and Natural Rights. Oxford: Clarendon.
12. Gardner, John. 2007. Some Types of Law. In Common Law Theory. Ed. D. Edlin, 51-80. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
13. Garrett, Elizabeth. 2009. Preferences, Laws, and Default Rules. Harvard Law Review 122: 2104-38.
14. Gilbert, Margaret. 2000. Sociality and Responsibility: New Essays in Plural Subject Theory. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
15. Goldsworthy, Jeffrey. 2000. Dworkin as an Originalist? Constitutional Commentary 17: 49-78.
16. Guest, Stephen. 1997. Interpretation and Commitment in Legal Reasoning. In Legislation and the Courts. Ed. Michael Freeman, 133-53. Dartmouth: Aldershot.
17. Hart, H. L. A. 1994. The Concept of Law. 2nd ed. Oxford: Clarendon.
18. Kutz, Christopher. 2000. Complicity: Ethics and Law for a Collective Age. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
19. MacCallum, Gerald C. 1993. Legislative Intent and Other Essays on Law, Politics, and Morality. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
20. Neale, Stephen. 2005. Pragmatism and Binding. In Semantics vs. Pragmatics. Ed. Zoltan Szabó, 165-285. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
21. Raz, Joseph. 1996. Intention in Interpretation. In The Autonomy of Law: Essays on Legal Positivism. Ed. R. George, 249-86. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
22. Searle, John. 1990. Collective Intentions and Actions. In Intentions in Communication. Eds. Philip Cohen, Jerry Morgan and Martha Pollack, 401-16. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
23. Searle, John. 1995. The Construction of Social Reality. New York, NY: Free Press.
24. Steyn, Lord Johan. 2001. Pepper v Hart; A Re-examination. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 21: 59-72.
25. Tuomela, Raimo. 2007. The Philosophy of Sociality: The Shared Point of View. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
26. Waldron, Jeremy. 1999a. Law and Disagreement. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
27. Waldron, Jeremy. 1999b. The Dignity of Legislation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
28. Yowell, Paul. 2007. A Critical Examination of Dworkin's Theory of Rights. American Journal of Jurisprudence 52: 93-137.