Abstract
This essay argues that legal efficacy understood as existent binding force
and as dominance of a system of coercion vis-_a-vis competing systems is not strictly a matter of fact, but involves what can be termed justified normativity in a factual context. The argument is divided into four sections. The first three sections describe different dimensions of a normative concept of legal efficacy applied to legal systems: efficacy as persuasiveness, as indirect communication, and as constitutive obedience. The final section focuses on the efficacy of individual norms and adds a new criterion – membership – which establishes a multi-layered test of efficacy.
and as dominance of a system of coercion vis-_a-vis competing systems is not strictly a matter of fact, but involves what can be termed justified normativity in a factual context. The argument is divided into four sections. The first three sections describe different dimensions of a normative concept of legal efficacy applied to legal systems: efficacy as persuasiveness, as indirect communication, and as constitutive obedience. The final section focuses on the efficacy of individual norms and adds a new criterion – membership – which establishes a multi-layered test of efficacy.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 460-477 |
Number of pages | 18 |
Journal | Ratio Juris |
Volume | 29 |
Issue number | 4 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 2016 |