“Further Development of Law by Judges” – A Comparative Study of dynamic interpretation and related concepts in Germany, France, the EU and the USA

该研究项目涉及分析和讨论德国关于“richterliche Rechtsfortbildung”(“法官进一步发展法律”)概念的辩论。它追求的目标是揭示这一概念背后的先前假设，并在此基础上用两种不同的方法重新界定辩论中的冲突界线。这两种方法的结合将使“丰富的正义”概念背后的先前假设能够得到全面的考虑：从实体和认识论的角度。第一种方法需要以基础和背景为导向的比较法研究，目的是从法国、美国和欧盟法律辩论的角度反映德国的“richterliche Rechtsfortbildung”概念。这种比较的目的是要表明，德国辩论的实际核心不是“富国至上”的概念本身，而是(未说明的)关于通过司法立法演变法律的先验假设，这种比较的结果变得特别容易受到审查和讨论。此外，比较的目的是为了验证这样一种假设，即先前的假设和实际概念的结合以及对“富而有力的法律”的关注构成了德国辩论的特殊性，因为这只是通过司法立法演变的一种法律方式。第二种方法基于认识论的洞察力，旨在将第一种方法的结果复杂地转移到德国的辩论中。为此，德国的辩论将从认识论的角度进行组织。其目的是证明，德国关于“richterliche Rechtsfortbildung”的辩论，除了关于法律通过司法立法演变的大量先前假设之外，还具有(未表达或未考虑的)认识论假设的特点。这里要考察的假设是，在不同的认识论假设下，“丰富的正确”一词被用来描述、解释或批评不同的现象，这些现象不仅构成一个话语，而且是几个关于认识论的话语。

The research project is concerned with the analysis and discussion of the German debate on the concept of “richterliche Rechtsfortbildung” (“further development of law by judges”). It pursues the goal of revealing the prior assumptions underlying this concept and, on this basis, of redefining the lines of conflict within the debate with two different approaches. The combination of these two approaches will enable the prior assumptions underlying the concept of “richterliche Rechtsfortbildung” to be comprehensively considered: both in terms of substance and epistemology. The first approach entails a basis- and context-oriented comparative law study with the aim of reflecting the German concept of “richterliche Rechtsfortbildung” from the perspectives of the debates on French, US and EU law. This comparison is intended to show that the actual core of the German debate is not the concept of “richterliche Rechtsfortbildung” as such, but (unexpressed) prior assumptions regarding the evolution of law through judicial lawmaking, which as a result of the comparison become particularly open to scrutiny and discussion. In addition, the comparison is intended to check the hypothesis that the combination of prior assumptions and the actual concept as well as the focus on “richterliche Rechtsfortbildung” as only one way of law being evolved through judicial lawmaking constitute particularities of the German debate. The second approach, which is based on epistemological insights, is designed to enable a sophisticated transfer of the findings of the first approach into the German debate. For this purpose, the German debate is to be structured from an epistemological perspective. The aim is to demonstrate that the German debate on “richterliche Rechtsfortbildung” is, in addition to the substantial prior assumptions on the evolution of law through judicial lawmaking, characterized by (unexpressed or unconsidered) epistemological assumptions. The hypothesis to be examined here is that, given different epistemological assumptions, the term “richterliche Rechtsfortbildung” is used to describe, explain or criticize different phenomena constituting not one discourse only, but several discourses in respect of epistemology.