Revisiting Pound's Law in Action and Ehrlich's Living Law to Find the "Gap": A Compilation of Lecture Notes
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.37253/jjr.v24i2.7220Keywords:
Revisiting Pound’s Law, Ehrlich’s Living Law, Lecture NotesAbstract
Finding research "gap" is an important aspect that must always be done when starting research. Especially if the research is a sociological research. This article aims to shed light on the sociological approach in legal research into approaches, namely the Sociology of Law approach and the approach of Socio-legal Studies. These two approaches have different and unique ways of defining research "gaps" This article will examine using empirical methods that rely on primary and secondary data, as well as inductive methods to analyze data. A comparison will also be made between Ehrlich's "living law" and Pound's "law in action" so that the differences between the two ideas can be found so that in the future, future researchers will not consider the two ideas identical.
Downloads
References
Blewer, R. (2021). “Changes in Law Were Full of Dangerâ€: Conclusion. In D. G. Barrie (Ed.), Child Witnesses in Twentieth Century Australian Courtrooms (pp. 241–252). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-69791-4_9
Fillafer, F. L. (2022). Imperial Diversity, Fractured Sovereignty, and Legal Universals: Hans Kelsen and Eugen Ehrlich in their Habsburg Context. Modern Intellectual History, 19(2), 421–443. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1479244320000542
Gilbert, M. D. (2015). Insincere Rules. Virginia Law Review, 101(8), 2185–2224.
Harding, M. (2016). Equity and the Rule of Law. The Law Quarterly Review, 132(1), 278–302.
Karton, J. (2020). International Arbitration as Comparative Law in Action. Journal of Dispute Resolution, 2020(2), 293–326.
Müller-Funk, W. (2020). From Habsburg Myth to Kakanien Revisited. In E. Sturm-Trigonakis (Ed.), World Literature and the Postcolonial: Narratives of (Neo) Colonialization in a Globalized World (pp. 49–68). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-61785-4_4
Nelken, D. (1981). The Gap Problem in the Sociology of Law: A Theoretical Review. Windsor Yearbook of Access to Justice, 1, 35–61.
Nelken, D. (1984). Law in Action or Living Law? Back to the Beginning in Sociology of Law. Legal Studies, 4(2), 157–174. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-121X.1984.tb00439.x
O’Day, J. F. (1966). Ehrlich’s Living Law Revisited-Further Vindication for a Prophet without Honor. Western Reserve Law Review, 18(1), 210–231.
Sonata, D. L. (2014). Metode Penelitian Hukum Normatif dan Empiris: Karakteristik Khas dari Metode Meneliti Hukum. Fiat Justisia: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, 8(1), 15–35. https://doi.org/10.25041/fiatjustisia.v8no1.283
Tamanaha, B. Z. (2020). Sociological Jurisprudence Past and Present. Law & Social Inquiry, 45(2), 493–520. https://doi.org/10.1017/lsi.2019.26
Tan, D. (2021). Metode Penelitian Hukum: Mengupas dan Mengulas Metodologi dalam Menyelenggarakan Penelitian Hukum. NUSANTARA: Jurnal Ilmu Pengetahuan Sosial, 8(8), 2463–2478. https://doi.org/10.31604/jips.v8i8.2021.2463-2478
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 David Tan
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
2.png){kind=small}
.png){kind=small}
