Standard legal scholarship applies hermeneutics (i.e.,
Clemens Kaupa
1

Ok, so this is related to the other response from you in Ines’ question.

So basically you’re saying that judges’ decision are based not only on hermeneutics, but also on other professional factors (colleagues, chances of appelating, etc.), while normally researchers purely apply hermeneutics, and this is the reason why they may lead to different solutions?

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.