Course Information

N_FLA Fundamentals of Legal Argumentation

Extent and Intensity

0/2/0. 3 credit(s). Type of Completion: z (credit).

Guaranteed by

JUDr. Petr Čechák, Ph.D.
Department of Law – Departments – University of Finance and Administration
Contact Person: Tereza Švestáková

Prerequisites

There are no prerequisites for this course.

Course Enrolment Limitations

The course is offered to students of any study field.

Course objectives

The aim of the course is to make students familiar with the very concept of argumentation, functions of argumentation in relation to law and different methods of argumentation. The main objective of the course is to develop and cultivate practical skills directly related to legal argumentation and application of law. Particular argumentation methods should be just briefly outlined. The main emphasis of the course should be put on teaching students to use legal argumentation in practice. The course will be terminated by an academic essay dealing with some questions concerning either the theory or the practice of legal argumentation based on the topics presented in the course. By means of such an essay students should prove their concerning understanding. A satisfactory essay will be graded by a credit.

Learning outcomes

Student should be able:
- explain concept of legal argumentation
- explain nature of different argumentative approaches
- explain distinction of argumentation by legal rules and by legal principles
- explain concepts: plain meaning rule, golden rule, mischief rule
- enumerate and identify in practice types of falacies

Syllabus

• (1) Concept of legal argumentation
• (2) Logical approach to legal argumentation
• (3) Rhetorical approach to legal argumentation
• (4) Dialogical approach to legal argumentation
• (5) Theory of discourse
• (6) Formal fallacies
• (7) Informal falacies
• (8) Textual v. purposive approach to statutory interpretation
• (9) Indefinite legal concepts and judicial discretion
• (10) Interpretation of rules v. principles (hard cases)
• (11) Analysis of selected cases 1
• (12) Analysis of selected cases 2

Literature

required literature
• FETERIS, E. T. Fundamentals of Legal Argumentation : A Survey of Theories on the Justification of Judicial Decisions, Second edition.; Springer: The Netherlands, 2017
• RAHMAN, S, ARMGART M, KVERNENES HCN. New developments in legal reasoning and logic : from ancient law to modern legal systems. Cham: Springer; 2022

recommended literature
• Bernall, Carlos: Legal Argumentation and the Normativity of Legal Norms. COGENCY Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 53-66, Summer 2011
• ALEXY, R. A theory of legal argumentation: the theory of rational discourse as theory of legal justification. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010, ISBN-13: 978-0199584222
• SHAPIRO SJ. Legality. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 2013

not specified
• Hart, Herbert L. A.: The Concept of Law. Clarendon Press. Oxford. Oxford University Press; 315 p., 1961
• Clements, Cory S.: Perception and Persuasion in Legal Argumentation: Using Informal Fallacies and Cognitive Biases to Win the War of Words. BYU L. Rev. 319, 2013
• Fuller, Lon L.: The Morality of Law. Yale University Press, 262 p., 1977
• Bertea, Stefano: Certainty, Reasonableness and Argumentation in Law. Argumentation, Volume 18, Issue 4, pp. 465–478, January 2004

Teaching methods

Lectures and seminars in full-time study; tutorials in part-time study; compulsory seminar participation is 75% in full-time study, compulsory tutorial participation is 50% in part-time study. Students who fail to meet the mandatory level of participation may be given during the semester additional study obligations (to the extent that will demonstrate academic achievement and acquired competencies necessary for successful completion of course).

Assessment methods

The course is terminated by credit awarded based proceeding of an academic essay .

Language of instruction

English

Further comments (probably available only in Czech)

The course can also be completed outside the examination period.
Information on the extent and intensity of the course: 16 hodin KS/semestr.

N_FLA Fundamentals of Legal Argumentation

Extent and Intensity

0/2/0. 3 credit(s). Type of Completion: z (credit).

Teacher(s)

JUDr. Petr Čechák, Ph.D. (seminar tutor)

Guaranteed by

JUDr. Petr Čechák, Ph.D.
Department of Law – Departments – University of Finance and Administration
Contact Person: Tereza Švestáková

Timetable of Seminar Groups

N_FLA/cKPH: each even Tuesday 8:45–9:29 E228, each even Tuesday 9:30–10:15 E228, each even Tuesday 10:30–11:14 E228, each even Tuesday 11:15–12:00 E228, P. Čechák
N_FLA/vBSKPH: Sat 10. 2. 14:00–15:30 E306, 15:45–17:15 E306, Fri 23. 2. 17:30–19:00 S13, 19:15–20:45 S13, Sat 9. 3. 9:45–11:15 E306, 11:30–13:00 E306, Fri 12. 4. 17:30–19:00 S13, 19:15–20:45 S13, P. Čechák
N_FLA/vBSMO: Fri 2. 2. 14:00–15:30 M27, 15:45–17:15 M27, Fri 16. 2. 14:00–15:30 M27, 15:45–17:15 M27, Fri 1. 3. 14:00–15:30 M27, 15:45–17:15 M27, Fri 15. 3. 14:00–15:30 M27, 15:45–17:15 M27, P. Čechák
N_FLA/vKKV: Fri 9. 2. 14:00–15:30 KV301, 15:45–17:15 KV301, Sat 24. 2. 14:00–15:30 KV301, 15:45–17:15 KV301, Fri 8. 3. 14:00–15:30 KV301, 15:45–17:15 KV301, Sat 13. 4. 14:00–15:30 KV301, 15:45–17:15 KV301, P. Čechák

Prerequisites

There are no prerequisites for this course.

Course Enrolment Limitations

The course is offered to students of any study field.

Course objectives

The aim of the course is to make students familiar with the very concept of argumentation, functions of argumentation in relation to law and different methods of argumentation. The main objective of the course is to develop and cultivate practical skills directly related to legal argumentation and application of law. Particular argumentation methods should be just briefly outlined. The main emphasis of the course should be put on teaching students to use legal argumentation in practice. The course will be terminated by an academic essay dealing with some questions concerning either the theory or the practice of legal argumentation based on the topics presented in the course. By means of such an essay students should prove their concerning understanding. A satisfactory essay will be graded by a credit.

Learning outcomes

Student should be able:
- explain concept of legal argumentation
- explain nature of different argumentative approaches
- explain distinction of argumentation by legal rules and by legal principles
- explain concepts: plain meaning rule, golden rule, mischief rule
- enumerate and identify in practice types of falacies

Syllabus

• (1) The Outline of a Theory of Legal Argumentation and the Concept of Law
• (2) Legal Argument Template
• (3) Problem of the Justification of Legal Decisions and the Topic Theory
• (4) Correctness of Normative Statements and the Morality of Law
• (5) General Practical Discourse
• (6) Legal Discourse as a Special Case
• (7) Perception and Persuasion in Legal Argumentation
• (8) Informal vs. Formal Fallacies and Cognitive Biases
• (9) The Correspondence Theory of Truth
• (10) Analogy vs. Argument from the Contrary (argumentum e contrario)
• (11) Argument from a Yet Stronger Reason (argumentum a fortiori) and Argument from Authority or an Appeal to Authority (argumentum ad verecundiam)
• (12) Argument (Reduction) to Absurdity (argumentum ad absurdum) and Proof by Contradiction

Literature

recommended literature
• ALEXY, R. A theory of legal argumentation: the theory of rational discourse as theory of legal justification. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010, ISBN-13: 978-0199584222

not specified
• Feteris, Eveline: The Study of Legal Argumentation in Argumentation Theory and Legal Theory: Approaches and Developments. COGENCY Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 11-32, Summer 2011
• Clements, Cory S.: Perception and Persuasion in Legal Argumentation: Using Informal Fallacies and Cognitive Biases to Win the War of Words. BYU L. Rev. 319, 2013
• David, Marian: The Correspondence Theory of Truth. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2015.
• Fuller, Lon L.: The Morality of Law. Yale University Press, 262 p., 1977
• Hart, Herbert L. A.: The Concept of Law. Clarendon Press. Oxford. Oxford University Press; 315 p., 1961
• Bertea, Stefano: Certainty, Reasonableness and Argumentation in Law. Argumentation, Volume 18, Issue 4, pp. 465–478, January 2004
• White, Nancy J.: Simple Steps: Teaching Legal Argumentation Using the Legal Argument Template. Journal of Legal Studies in Business, pp. 1-43, 2010
• Bertea, Stefano: Legal Argumentation Theory and the Concept of Law. F.H. van Eemeren, et al. (eds.), Anyone Who Has a View. Theoretical Contributions to the Study of Argumentation, Dordrecht: Kluwer, pp. 213-226, 2003
• Bernall, Carlos: Legal Argumentation and the Normativity of Legal Norms. COGENCY Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 53-66, Summer 2011
• Radbruch, Gustav: Statutory Lawlessness and Supra-Statutory Law. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 26, No. 1 (2006), pp. 1–11

Teaching methods

Lectures and seminars in full-time study; tutorials in part-time study; compulsory seminar participation is 75% in full-time study, compulsory tutorial participation is 50% in part-time study. Students who fail to meet the mandatory level of participation may be given during the semester additional study obligations (to the extent that will demonstrate academic achievement and acquired competencies necessary for successful completion of course).

Assessment methods

The course is terminated by credit awarded based proceeding of an academic essay .

Language of instruction

English

Further comments (probably available only in Czech)

The course can also be completed outside the examination period.
Information on the extent and intensity of the course: 16 hodin KS/semestr.

N_FLA Fundamentals of Legal Argumentation

Extent and Intensity

0/2/0. 3 credit(s). Type of Completion: z (credit).

Teacher(s)

JUDr. Petr Čechák, Ph.D. (seminar tutor)

Guaranteed by

JUDr. Petr Čechák, Ph.D.
Department of Law – Departments – University of Finance and Administration
Contact Person: Tereza Švestáková

Timetable of Seminar Groups

N_FLA/cKPH: each odd Tuesday 10:30–11:14 S23, each odd Tuesday 11:15–12:00 S23, each odd Tuesday 12:15–12:59 S23, each odd Tuesday 13:00–13:45 S23, P. Čechák
N_FLA/vBSKPH: Sat 25. 2. 9:45–11:15 E227, 11:30–13:00 E227, Sat 11. 3. 9:45–11:15 E306, 11:30–13:00 E306, Fri 14. 4. 17:30–19:00 S24, 19:15–20:45 S24, Fri 28. 4. 17:30–19:00 S24, 19:15–20:45 S24, P. Čechák
N_FLA/vBSKV: Fri 24. 2. 14:00–15:30 KV308, 15:45–17:15 KV308, Fri 10. 3. 14:00–15:30 KV308, 15:45–17:15 KV308, Sat 15. 4. 14:00–15:30 KV308, 15:45–17:15 KV308, Sat 29. 4. 9:45–11:15 KV308, 11:30–13:00 KV308, P. Čechák

Prerequisites

There are no prerequisites for this course.

Course Enrolment Limitations

The course is offered to students of any study field.

Course objectives

The aim of the course is to make students familiar with the very concept of argumentation, functions of argumentation in relation to law and different methods of argumentation. The main objective of the course is to develop and cultivate practical skills directly related to legal argumentation and application of law. Particular argumentation methods should be just briefly outlined. The main emphasis of the course should be put on teaching students to use legal argumentation in practice. The course will be terminated by an academic essay dealing with some questions concerning either the theory or the practice of legal argumentation based on the topics presented in the course. By means of such an essay students should prove their concerning understanding. A satisfactory essay will be graded by a credit.

Learning outcomes

Student should be able:
- explain concept of legal argumentation
- explain nature of different argumentative approaches
- explain distinction of argumentation by legal rules and by legal principles
- explain concepts: plain meaning rule, golden rule, mischief rule
- enumerate and identify in practice types of falacies

Syllabus

• (1) The Outline of a Theory of Legal Argumentation and the Concept of Law
• (2) Legal Argument Template
• (3) Problem of the Justification of Legal Decisions and the Topic Theory
• (4) Correctness of Normative Statements and the Morality of Law
• (5) General Practical Discourse
• (6) Legal Discourse as a Special Case
• (7) Perception and Persuasion in Legal Argumentation
• (8) Informal vs. Formal Fallacies and Cognitive Biases
• (9) The Correspondence Theory of Truth
• (10) Analogy vs. Argument from the Contrary (argumentum e contrario)
• (11) Argument from a Yet Stronger Reason (argumentum a fortiori) and Argument from Authority or an Appeal to Authority (argumentum ad verecundiam)
• (12) Argument (Reduction) to Absurdity (argumentum ad absurdum) and Proof by Contradiction

Literature

recommended literature
• ALEXY, R. A theory of legal argumentation: the theory of rational discourse as theory of legal justification. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010, ISBN-13: 978-0199584222

not specified
• Feteris, Eveline: The Study of Legal Argumentation in Argumentation Theory and Legal Theory: Approaches and Developments. COGENCY Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 11-32, Summer 2011
• Clements, Cory S.: Perception and Persuasion in Legal Argumentation: Using Informal Fallacies and Cognitive Biases to Win the War of Words. BYU L. Rev. 319, 2013
• David, Marian: The Correspondence Theory of Truth. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2015.
• Fuller, Lon L.: The Morality of Law. Yale University Press, 262 p., 1977
• Hart, Herbert L. A.: The Concept of Law. Clarendon Press. Oxford. Oxford University Press; 315 p., 1961
• Bertea, Stefano: Certainty, Reasonableness and Argumentation in Law. Argumentation, Volume 18, Issue 4, pp. 465–478, January 2004
• White, Nancy J.: Simple Steps: Teaching Legal Argumentation Using the Legal Argument Template. Journal of Legal Studies in Business, pp. 1-43, 2010
• Bertea, Stefano: Legal Argumentation Theory and the Concept of Law. F.H. van Eemeren, et al. (eds.), Anyone Who Has a View. Theoretical Contributions to the Study of Argumentation, Dordrecht: Kluwer, pp. 213-226, 2003
• Bernall, Carlos: Legal Argumentation and the Normativity of Legal Norms. COGENCY Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 53-66, Summer 2011
• Radbruch, Gustav: Statutory Lawlessness and Supra-Statutory Law. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 26, No. 1 (2006), pp. 1–11

Teaching methods

Lectures and seminars in full-time study; tutorials in part-time study; compulsory seminar participation is 75% in full-time study, compulsory tutorial participation is 50% in part-time study. Students who fail to meet the mandatory level of participation may be given during the semester additional study obligations (to the extent that will demonstrate academic achievement and acquired competencies necessary for successful completion of course).

Assessment methods

The course is terminated by credit awarded based proceeding of an academic essay .

Language of instruction

English

Further comments (probably available only in Czech)

The course can also be completed outside the examination period.
Information on the extent and intensity of the course: 16 hodin KS/semestr.

N_FLA Fundamentals of Legal Argumentation

Extent and Intensity

1/1/0. 3 credit(s). Type of Completion: z (credit).

Teacher(s)

JUDr. Petr Čechák, Ph.D. (seminar tutor)

Guaranteed by

JUDr. Petr Čechák, Ph.D.
Department of Law – Departments – University of Finance and Administration
Contact Person: Tereza Švestáková

Timetable of Seminar Groups

N_FLA/cBSKV: each odd Wednesday 12:15–12:59 KV308, each odd Wednesday 13:00–13:45 KV308, except Wed 13. 4., except Wed 27. 4. ; and Wed 4. 5. 17:30–19:00 KV308, 19:15–20:45 KV308, P. Čechák
N_FLA/cBSMO: each even Tuesday 14:00–14:44 M12KL, each even Tuesday 14:45–15:30 M12KL, except Tue 5. 4. ; and Tue 3. 5. 19:15–20:45 M01, P. Čechák
N_FLA/cBSPH: each odd Tuesday 15:45–16:29 S11, each odd Tuesday 16:30–17:15 S11, except Tue 12. 4., except Tue 26. 4. ; and Thu 21. 4. 14:00–15:30 S24, Thu 5. 5. 19:15–20:45 ONLINE, P. Čechák
N_FLA/pBSKV: each odd Wednesday 10:30–11:14 KV308, each odd Wednesday 11:15–12:00 KV308, except Wed 13. 4., except Wed 27. 4. ; and Wed 30. 3. 15:45–17:15 KV308, Wed 4. 5. 15:45–17:15 KV308, P. Čechák
N_FLA/pBSMO: each even Tuesday 12:15–12:59 M12KL, each even Tuesday 13:00–13:45 M12KL, except Tue 5. 4. ; and Tue 3. 5. 17:30–19:00 M01, P. Čechák
N_FLA/pBSPH: each odd Tuesday 14:00–14:44 S11, each odd Tuesday 14:45–15:30 S11, except Tue 12. 4., except Tue 26. 4. ; and Thu 21. 4. 12:15–13:45 S24, Thu 5. 5. 17:30–19:00 ONLINE, P. Čechák
N_FLA/vBSKV: Sat 12. 3. 14:00–15:30 KV308, 15:45–17:15 KV308, Sat 9. 4. 9:45–11:15 KV308, 11:30–13:00 KV308, Fri 6. 5. 14:00–15:30 KV308, 15:45–17:15 KV308, P. Čechák
N_FLA/vBSMO: Sat 19. 2. 9:45–11:15 M22, 11:30–13:00 M22, Sat 5. 3. 9:45–11:15 M22, 11:30–13:00 M22, Sat 19. 3. 9:45–11:15 M22, 11:30–13:00 M22, P. Čechák
N_FLA/vBSPH: Sat 26. 2. 14:00–15:30 E230, 15:45–17:15 E230, Fri 11. 3. 17:30–19:00 S23, 19:15–20:45 S23, Sat 26. 3. 14:00–15:30 E230, 15:45–17:15 E230, P. Čechák

Prerequisites

There are no prerequisites for this course.

Course Enrolment Limitations

The course is offered to students of any study field.

Course objectives

The aim of the course is to make students familiar with the very concept of argumentation, functions of argumentation in relation to law and different methods of argumentation. The main objective of the course is to develop and cultivate practical skills directly related to legal argumentation and application of law. Particular argumentation methods should be just briefly outlined. The main emphasis of the course should be put on teaching students to use legal argumentation in practice. The course will be terminated by an academic essay dealing with some questions concerning either the theory or the practice of legal argumentation based on the topics presented in the course. By means of such an essay students should prove their concerning understanding. A satisfactory essay will be graded by a credit.

Learning outcomes

Student should be able:
- explain concept of legal argumentation
- explain nature of different argumentative approaches
- explain distinction of argumentation by legal rules and by legal principles
- explain concepts: plain meaning rule, golden rule, mischief rule
- enumerate and identify in practice types of falacies

Syllabus

• (1) The Outline of a Theory of Legal Argumentation and the Concept of Law
• (2) Legal Argument Template
• (3) Problem of the Justification of Legal Decisions and the Topic Theory
• (4) Correctness of Normative Statements and the Morality of Law
• (5) General Practical Discourse
• (6) Legal Discourse as a Special Case
• (7) Perception and Persuasion in Legal Argumentation
• (8) Informal vs. Formal Fallacies and Cognitive Biases
• (9) The Correspondence Theory of Truth
• (10) Analogy vs. Argument from the Contrary (argumentum e contrario)
• (11) Argument from a Yet Stronger Reason (argumentum a fortiori) and Argument from Authority or an Appeal to Authority (argumentum ad verecundiam)
• (12) Argument (Reduction) to Absurdity (argumentum ad absurdum) and Proof by Contradiction

Literature

recommended literature
• ALEXY, R. A theory of legal argumentation: the theory of rational discourse as theory of legal justification. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010, ISBN-13: 978-0199584222

not specified
• Feteris, Eveline: The Study of Legal Argumentation in Argumentation Theory and Legal Theory: Approaches and Developments. COGENCY Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 11-32, Summer 2011
• Clements, Cory S.: Perception and Persuasion in Legal Argumentation: Using Informal Fallacies and Cognitive Biases to Win the War of Words. BYU L. Rev. 319, 2013
• David, Marian: The Correspondence Theory of Truth. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2015.
• Fuller, Lon L.: The Morality of Law. Yale University Press, 262 p., 1977
• Hart, Herbert L. A.: The Concept of Law. Clarendon Press. Oxford. Oxford University Press; 315 p., 1961
• Bertea, Stefano: Certainty, Reasonableness and Argumentation in Law. Argumentation, Volume 18, Issue 4, pp. 465–478, January 2004
• White, Nancy J.: Simple Steps: Teaching Legal Argumentation Using the Legal Argument Template. Journal of Legal Studies in Business, pp. 1-43, 2010
• Bertea, Stefano: Legal Argumentation Theory and the Concept of Law. F.H. van Eemeren, et al. (eds.), Anyone Who Has a View. Theoretical Contributions to the Study of Argumentation, Dordrecht: Kluwer, pp. 213-226, 2003
• Bernall, Carlos: Legal Argumentation and the Normativity of Legal Norms. COGENCY Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 53-66, Summer 2011
• Radbruch, Gustav: Statutory Lawlessness and Supra-Statutory Law. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 26, No. 1 (2006), pp. 1–11

Teaching methods

Lectures and seminars in full-time study; tutorials in part-time study; compulsory seminar participation is 75% in full-time study, compulsory tutorial participation is 50% in part-time study. Students who fail to meet the mandatory level of participation may be given during the semester additional study obligations (to the extent that will demonstrate academic achievement and acquired competencies necessary for successful completion of course).

Assessment methods

The course is terminated by credit awarded based proceeding of an academic essay .

Language of instruction

English

Further comments (probably available only in Czech)

The course can also be completed outside the examination period.
Information on the extent and intensity of the course: 12 hodin KS/semestr.

N_FLA Fundamentals of Legal Argumentation

Extent and Intensity

1/1/0. 3 credit(s). Type of Completion: z (credit).

Teacher(s)

doc. JUDr. PhDr. Jiří Bílý, CSc. (seminar tutor)
JUDr. Petr Čechák, Ph.D. (seminar tutor)
prof. Dr. et Dr. Vladimír Robert Matas, MA, CSc. (seminar tutor)

Guaranteed by

JUDr. Petr Čechák, Ph.D.
Department of Law – Departments – University of Finance and Administration
Contact Person: Tereza Švestáková

Timetable of Seminar Groups

N_FLA/cBSMO: each even Monday 15:45–16:29 M15, each even Monday 16:30–17:15 M15, V. Matas
N_FLA/cBSPH: each odd Monday 14:00–14:44 S13, each odd Monday 14:45–15:30 S13, except Mon 1. 3. ; and Thu 25. 3. 14:00–15:30 S11, J. Bílý
N_FLA/pBSMO: each even Monday 14:00–14:44 M15, each even Monday 14:45–15:30 M15, V. Matas
N_FLA/pBSPH: each odd Monday 12:15–12:59 S13, each odd Monday 13:00–13:45 S13, except Mon 1. 3. ; and Thu 25. 3. 12:15–13:45 S11, J. Bílý
N_FLA/vBSPH: Sat 13. 3. 9:45–11:15 S24, 11:30–13:00 S24, Fri 16. 4. 14:00–15:30 S24, 15:45–17:15 S24, Fri 23. 4. 14:00–15:30 S24, 15:45–17:15 S24, P. Čechák

Prerequisites

There are no prerequisites for this course.

Course Enrolment Limitations

The course is offered to students of any study field.

Course objectives

The aim of the course is to make students familiar with the very concept of argumentation, functions of argumentation in relation to law and different methods of argumentation. The main objective of the course is to develop and cultivate practical skills directly related to legal argumentation and application of law. Particular argumentation methods should be just briefly outlined. The main emphasis of the course should be put on teaching students to use legal argumentation in practice. The course will be terminated by an academic essay dealing with some questions concerning either the theory or the practice of legal argumentation based on the topics presented in the course. By means of such an essay students should prove their concerning understanding. A satisfactory essay will be graded by a credit.

Learning outcomes

Student should be able:
- explain concept of legal argumentation
- explain nature of different argumentative approaches
- explain distinction of argumentation by legal rules and by legal principles
- explain concepts: plain meaning rule, golden rule, mischief rule
- enumerate and identify in practice types of falacies

Syllabus

• (1) The Outline of a Theory of Legal Argumentation and the Concept of Law
• (2) Legal Argument Template
• (3) Problem of the Justification of Legal Decisions and the Topic Theory
• (4) Correctness of Normative Statements and the Morality of Law
• (5) General Practical Discourse
• (6) Legal Discourse as a Special Case
• (7) Perception and Persuasion in Legal Argumentation
• (8) Informal vs. Formal Fallacies and Cognitive Biases
• (9) The Correspondence Theory of Truth
• (10) Analogy vs. Argument from the Contrary (argumentum e contrario)
• (11) Argument from a Yet Stronger Reason (argumentum a fortiori) and Argument from Authority or an Appeal to Authority (argumentum ad verecundiam)
• (12) Argument (Reduction) to Absurdity (argumentum ad absurdum) and Proof by Contradiction

Literature

recommended literature
• ALEXY, R. A theory of legal argumentation: the theory of rational discourse as theory of legal justification. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010, ISBN-13: 978-0199584222

not specified
• Feteris, Eveline: The Study of Legal Argumentation in Argumentation Theory and Legal Theory: Approaches and Developments. COGENCY Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 11-32, Summer 2011
• Clements, Cory S.: Perception and Persuasion in Legal Argumentation: Using Informal Fallacies and Cognitive Biases to Win the War of Words. BYU L. Rev. 319, 2013
• David, Marian: The Correspondence Theory of Truth. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2015.
• Fuller, Lon L.: The Morality of Law. Yale University Press, 262 p., 1977
• Hart, Herbert L. A.: The Concept of Law. Clarendon Press. Oxford. Oxford University Press; 315 p., 1961
• Bertea, Stefano: Certainty, Reasonableness and Argumentation in Law. Argumentation, Volume 18, Issue 4, pp. 465–478, January 2004
• White, Nancy J.: Simple Steps: Teaching Legal Argumentation Using the Legal Argument Template. Journal of Legal Studies in Business, pp. 1-43, 2010
• Bertea, Stefano: Legal Argumentation Theory and the Concept of Law. F.H. van Eemeren, et al. (eds.), Anyone Who Has a View. Theoretical Contributions to the Study of Argumentation, Dordrecht: Kluwer, pp. 213-226, 2003
• Bernall, Carlos: Legal Argumentation and the Normativity of Legal Norms. COGENCY Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 53-66, Summer 2011
• Radbruch, Gustav: Statutory Lawlessness and Supra-Statutory Law. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 26, No. 1 (2006), pp. 1–11

Teaching methods

Lectures and seminars in full-time study; tutorials in part-time study; compulsory seminar participation is 75% in full-time study, compulsory tutorial participation is 50% in part-time study. Students who fail to meet the mandatory level of participation may be given during the semester additional study obligations (to the extent that will demonstrate academic achievement and acquired competencies necessary for successful completion of course).

Assessment methods

The course is terminated by credit awarded based proceeding of an academic essay .

Language of instruction

English

Further comments (probably available only in Czech)

The course can also be completed outside the examination period.
Information on the extent and intensity of the course: 12 hodin KS/semestr.

N_FLA Fundamentals of Legal Argumentation

Extent and Intensity

1/1/0. 3 credit(s). Type of Completion: z (credit).

Teacher(s)

doc. JUDr. PhDr. Jiří Bílý, CSc. (seminar tutor)
Mgr. Marcela Hergesselová (seminar tutor)
PhDr. Ingrid Vichnarová (seminar tutor)

Guaranteed by

JUDr. Petr Čechák, Ph.D.
Department of Law – Departments – University of Finance and Administration
Contact Person: Tereza Švestáková

Timetable of Seminar Groups

N_FLA/cBSKV: each even Thursday 12:15–12:59 KV211, each even Thursday 13:00–13:45 KV211, except Thu 5. 3., except Thu 2. 4. ; and Tue 17. 3. 15:45–17:15 KV211, Mon 20. 4. 14:00–15:30 KV206, I. Vichnarová
N_FLA/cBSPH: each even Tuesday 15:45–16:29 S14, each even Tuesday 16:30–17:15 S14, J. Bílý
N_FLA/cKPH: each even Wednesday 17:30–18:14 S11, each even Wednesday 18:15–19:00 S11, J. Bílý
N_FLA/pBSKPH: each even Tuesday 14:00–14:44 S11, each even Tuesday 14:45–15:30 S11, J. Bílý
N_FLA/pBSKV: each even Thursday 10:30–11:14 KV211, each even Thursday 11:15–12:00 KV211, except Thu 5. 3., except Thu 2. 4. ; and Tue 17. 3. 14:00–15:30 KV211, Mon 6. 4. 14:00–15:30 KV206, I. Vichnarová
N_FLA/vBSKPH: Sat 29. 2. 9:45–11:15 S32, 11:30–13:00 S32, Fri 13. 3. 14:00–15:30 S32, J. Bílý
N_FLA/vBSKV: Sat 15. 2. 8:00–9:30 KV310, Fri 13. 3. 17:30–19:00 KV310, Fri 17. 4. 14:00–15:30 KV301, I. Vichnarová
N_FLA/vBSMO: Fri 7. 2. 17:30–19:00 M16, Sat 22. 2. 8:00–9:30 M27, 9:45–11:15 M27, M. Hergesselová

Prerequisites

There are no prerequisites for this course.

Course Enrolment Limitations

The course is offered to students of any study field.

Course objectives

The aim of the course is to make students familiar with the very concept of argumentation, functions of argumentation in relation to law and different methods of argumentation. The main objective of the course is to develop and cultivate practical skills directly related to legal argumentation and application of law. Particular argumentation methods should be just briefly outlined. The main emphasis of the course should be put on teaching students to use legal argumentation in practice. The course will be terminated by an academic essay dealing with some questions concerning either the theory or the practice of legal argumentation based on the topics presented in the course. By means of such an essay students should prove their concerning understanding. A satisfactory essay will be graded by a credit.

Learning outcomes

Student should be able:
- explain concept of legal argumentation
- explain nature of different argumentative approaches
- explain distinction of argumentation by legal rules and by legal principles
- explain concepts: plain meaning rule, golden rule, mischief rule
- enumerate and identify in practice types of falacies

Syllabus

• (1) The Outline of a Theory of Legal Argumentation and the Concept of Law
• (2) Legal Argument Template
• (3) Problem of the Justification of Legal Decisions and the Topic Theory
• (4) Correctness of Normative Statements and the Morality of Law
• (5) General Practical Discourse
• (6) Legal Discourse as a Special Case
• (7) Perception and Persuasion in Legal Argumentation
• (8) Informal vs. Formal Fallacies and Cognitive Biases
• (9) The Correspondence Theory of Truth
• (10) Analogy vs. Argument from the Contrary (argumentum e contrario)
• (11) Argument from a Yet Stronger Reason (argumentum a fortiori) and Argument from Authority or an Appeal to Authority (argumentum ad verecundiam)
• (12) Argument (Reduction) to Absurdity (argumentum ad absurdum) and Proof by Contradiction

Literature

recommended literature
• ALEXY, R. A theory of legal argumentation: the theory of rational discourse as theory of legal justification. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010, ISBN-13: 978-0199584222

not specified
• Feteris, Eveline: The Study of Legal Argumentation in Argumentation Theory and Legal Theory: Approaches and Developments. COGENCY Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 11-32, Summer 2011
• Clements, Cory S.: Perception and Persuasion in Legal Argumentation: Using Informal Fallacies and Cognitive Biases to Win the War of Words. BYU L. Rev. 319, 2013
• David, Marian: The Correspondence Theory of Truth. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2015.
• Fuller, Lon L.: The Morality of Law. Yale University Press, 262 p., 1977
• Hart, Herbert L. A.: The Concept of Law. Clarendon Press. Oxford. Oxford University Press; 315 p., 1961
• Bertea, Stefano: Certainty, Reasonableness and Argumentation in Law. Argumentation, Volume 18, Issue 4, pp. 465–478, January 2004
• White, Nancy J.: Simple Steps: Teaching Legal Argumentation Using the Legal Argument Template. Journal of Legal Studies in Business, pp. 1-43, 2010
• Bertea, Stefano: Legal Argumentation Theory and the Concept of Law. F.H. van Eemeren, et al. (eds.), Anyone Who Has a View. Theoretical Contributions to the Study of Argumentation, Dordrecht: Kluwer, pp. 213-226, 2003
• Bernall, Carlos: Legal Argumentation and the Normativity of Legal Norms. COGENCY Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 53-66, Summer 2011
• Radbruch, Gustav: Statutory Lawlessness and Supra-Statutory Law. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 26, No. 1 (2006), pp. 1–11

Teaching methods

Lectures and seminars in full-time study; tutorials in part-time study; compulsory seminar participation is 75% in full-time study, compulsory tutorial participation is 50% in part-time study. Students who fail to meet the mandatory level of participation may be given during the semester additional study obligations (to the extent that will demonstrate academic achievement and acquired competencies necessary for successful completion of course).

Assessment methods

The course is terminated by credit awarded based proceeding of an academic essay .

Language of instruction

English

Further comments (probably available only in Czech)

The course can also be completed outside the examination period.
Information on the extent and intensity of the course: 6 hodin KS/semestr.

N_FLA Fundamentals of Legal Argumentation

Extent and Intensity

1/1. 3 credit(s). Type of Completion: z (credit).

Teacher(s)

Mgr. Marcela Hergesselová (seminar tutor)
prof. Dr. et Dr. Vladimír Robert Matas, MA, CSc. (seminar tutor)
PhDr. Ingrid Vichnarová (seminar tutor)

Guaranteed by

JUDr. Petr Čechák, Ph.D.
Department of Law – Departments – University of Finance and Administration
Contact Person: Olga Soušková

Timetable of Seminar Groups

N_FLA/cBSMO: each odd Monday 12:15–12:59 M25, each odd Monday 13:00–13:45 M25, M. Hergesselová
N_FLA/cKPH: each odd Thursday 15:45–16:29 S13, each odd Thursday 16:30–17:15 S13, V. Matas
N_FLA/cPPPH: each odd Thursday 17:30–18:14 S11, each odd Thursday 18:15–19:00 S11, V. Matas
N_FLA/pBSMO: each odd Monday 10:30–11:14 M25, each odd Monday 11:15–12:00 M25, M. Hergesselová
N_FLA/pKPPPH: each odd Thursday 14:00–14:44 S11, each odd Thursday 14:45–15:30 S11, V. Matas
N_FLA/vBSKPH: Fri 15. 2. 14:00–15:30 S01, 15:45–17:15 S01, Fri 1. 3. 14:00–15:30 S01, V. Matas
N_FLA/vBSPPKV: Sat 16. 2. 9:45–11:15 KV301, 11:30–13:00 KV301, Sat 16. 3. 14:00–15:30 KV301, I. Vichnarová
N_FLA/vPPPVPH: Fri 1. 3. 15:45–17:15 S22, Fri 15. 3. 14:00–15:30 S33, 15:45–17:15 S33, V. Matas

Prerequisites

There are no prerequisites for this course.

Course Enrolment Limitations

The course is offered to students of any study field.

Course objectives

The aim of the course is to make students familiar with the very concept of argumentation, functions of argumentation in relation to law and different methods of argumentation. The main objective of the course is to develop and cultivate practical skills directly related to legal argumentation and application of law. Particular argumentation methods should be just briefly outlined. The main emphasis of the course should be put on teaching students to use legal argumentation in practice. The course will be terminated by an academic essay dealing with some questions concerning either the theory or the practice of legal argumentation based on the topics presented in the course. By means of such an essay students should prove their concerning understanding. A satisfactory essay will be graded by a credit.

Learning outcomes

Student should be able:
- explain concept of legal argumentation
- explain nature of different argumentative approaches
- explain distinction of argumentation by legal rules and by legal principles
- explain concepts: plain meaning rule, golden rule, mischief rule
- enumerate and identify in practice types of falacies

Syllabus

• (1) The Outline of a Theory of Legal Argumentation and the Concept of Law
• (2) Legal Argument Template
• (3) Problem of the Justification of Legal Decisions and the Topic Theory
• (4) Correctness of Normative Statements and the Morality of Law
• (5) General Practical Discourse
• (6) Legal Discourse as a Special Case
• (7) Perception and Persuasion in Legal Argumentation
• (8) Informal vs. Formal Fallacies and Cognitive Biases
• (9) The Correspondence Theory of Truth
• (10) Analogy vs. Argument from the Contrary (argumentum e contrario)
• (11) Argument from a Yet Stronger Reason (argumentum a fortiori) and Argument from Authority or an Appeal to Authority (argumentum ad verecundiam)
• (12) Argument (Reduction) to Absurdity (argumentum ad absurdum) and Proof by Contradiction

Literature

recommended literature
• ALEXY, R. A theory of legal argumentation: the theory of rational discourse as theory of legal justification. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010, ISBN-13: 978-0199584222

not specified
• Feteris, Eveline: The Study of Legal Argumentation in Argumentation Theory and Legal Theory: Approaches and Developments. COGENCY Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 11-32, Summer 2011
• Clements, Cory S.: Perception and Persuasion in Legal Argumentation: Using Informal Fallacies and Cognitive Biases to Win the War of Words. BYU L. Rev. 319, 2013
• David, Marian: The Correspondence Theory of Truth. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2015.
• Fuller, Lon L.: The Morality of Law. Yale University Press, 262 p., 1977
• Hart, Herbert L. A.: The Concept of Law. Clarendon Press. Oxford. Oxford University Press; 315 p., 1961
• Bertea, Stefano: Certainty, Reasonableness and Argumentation in Law. Argumentation, Volume 18, Issue 4, pp. 465–478, January 2004
• White, Nancy J.: Simple Steps: Teaching Legal Argumentation Using the Legal Argument Template. Journal of Legal Studies in Business, pp. 1-43, 2010
• Bertea, Stefano: Legal Argumentation Theory and the Concept of Law. F.H. van Eemeren, et al. (eds.), Anyone Who Has a View. Theoretical Contributions to the Study of Argumentation, Dordrecht: Kluwer, pp. 213-226, 2003
• Bernall, Carlos: Legal Argumentation and the Normativity of Legal Norms. COGENCY Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 53-66, Summer 2011
• Radbruch, Gustav: Statutory Lawlessness and Supra-Statutory Law. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 26, No. 1 (2006), pp. 1–11

Teaching methods

Lectures and seminars in full-time study; tutorials in part-time study; compulsory seminar participation is 75% in full-time study, compulsory tutorial participation is 50% in part-time study. Students who fail to meet the mandatory level of participation may be given during the semester additional study obligations (to the extent that will demonstrate academic achievement and acquired competencies necessary for successful completion of course).

Assessment methods

The course is terminated by credit awarded based proceeding of an academic essay .

Language of instruction

English

Further comments (probably available only in Czech)

The course can also be completed outside the examination period.
Information on the extent and intensity of the course: 6 hodin KS/semestr.

N_FLA Fundamentals of Legal Argumentation

Extent and Intensity

1/1. 3 credit(s). Type of Completion: z (credit).

Teacher(s)

JUDr. Petr Čechák, Ph.D. (seminar tutor)
prof. Dr. et Dr. Vladimír Robert Matas, MA, CSc. (seminar tutor)
PhDr. Ingrid Vichnarová (seminar tutor)

Guaranteed by

JUDr. Petr Čechák, Ph.D.
Department of Law – Departments – University of Finance and Administration
Contact Person: Olga Soušková

Timetable of Seminar Groups

N_FLA/cKKV: each odd Tuesday 12:15–12:59 KV308, each odd Tuesday 13:00–13:45 KV308, I. Vichnarová
N_FLA/cKPPPH: each even Friday 12:15–12:59 S14, each even Friday 13:00–13:45 S14, V. Matas
N_FLA/pKKV: each odd Tuesday 10:30–11:14 KV308, each odd Tuesday 11:15–12:00 KV308, I. Vichnarová
N_FLA/pKPPPH: each even Friday 10:30–11:14 S14, each even Friday 11:15–12:00 S14, V. Matas
N_FLA/vBSKPH: Fri 6. 4. 14:00–15:30 S24, Sat 21. 4. 9:45–11:15 S24, 11:30–13:00 S24, V. Matas
N_FLA/vKPPKV: Fri 16. 2. 15:45–17:15 KV310, 17:30–19:00 KV310, Fri 16. 3. 17:30–19:00 KV301, I. Vichnarová
N_FLA/vPPPVPH: Fri 20. 4. 17:30–19:00 S14, 19:15–20:45 S14, Fri 27. 4. 19:15–20:45 S14, P. Čechák

Prerequisites

There are no prerequisites for this course.

Course Enrolment Limitations

The course is offered to students of any study field.

Course objectives

The aim of the course is to make students familiar with the very concept of argumentation, functions of argumentation in relation to law and different methods of argumentation. The main objective of the course is to develop and cultivate practical skills directly related to legal argumentation and application of law. Particular argumentation methods should be just briefly outlined. The main emphasis of the course should be put on teaching students to use legal argumentation in practice. The course will be terminated by an academic essay dealing with some questions concerning either the theory or the practice of legal argumentation based on the topics presented in the course. By means of such an essay students should prove their concerning understanding. A satisfactory essay will be graded by a credit.

Syllabus

• (1) The Outline of a Theory of Legal Argumentation and the Concept of Law
• (2) Legal Argument Template
• (3) Problem of the Justification of Legal Decisions and the Topic Theory
• (4) Correctness of Normative Statements and the Morality of Law
• (5) General Practical Discourse
• (6) Legal Discourse as a Special Case
• (7) Perception and Persuasion in Legal Argumentation
• (8) Informal vs. Formal Fallacies and Cognitive Biases
• (9) The Correspondence Theory of Truth
• (10) Analogy vs. Argument from the Contrary (argumentum e contrario)
• (11) Argument from a Yet Stronger Reason (argumentum a fortiori) and Argument from Authority or an Appeal to Authority (argumentum ad verecundiam)
• (12) Argument (Reduction) to Absurdity (argumentum ad absurdum) and Proof by Contradiction

Literature

recommended literature
• ALEXY, R. A theory of legal argumentation: the theory of rational discourse as theory of legal justification. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010, ISBN-13: 978-0199584222

not specified
• Fuller, Lon L.: The Morality of Law. Yale University Press, 262 p., 1977
• Bertea, Stefano: Certainty, Reasonableness and Argumentation in Law. Argumentation, Volume 18, Issue 4, pp. 465–478, January 2004
• Feteris, Eveline: The Study of Legal Argumentation in Argumentation Theory and Legal Theory: Approaches and Developments. COGENCY Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 11-32, Summer 2011
• David, Marian: The Correspondence Theory of Truth. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2015.
• Hart, Herbert L. A.: The Concept of Law. Clarendon Press. Oxford. Oxford University Press; 315 p., 1961
• White, Nancy J.: Simple Steps: Teaching Legal Argumentation Using the Legal Argument Template. Journal of Legal Studies in Business, pp. 1-43, 2010
• Radbruch, Gustav: Statutory Lawlessness and Supra-Statutory Law. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 26, No. 1 (2006), pp. 1–11
• Bernall, Carlos: Legal Argumentation and the Normativity of Legal Norms. COGENCY Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 53-66, Summer 2011
• Clements, Cory S.: Perception and Persuasion in Legal Argumentation: Using Informal Fallacies and Cognitive Biases to Win the War of Words. BYU L. Rev. 319, 2013
• Bertea, Stefano: Legal Argumentation Theory and the Concept of Law. F.H. van Eemeren, et al. (eds.), Anyone Who Has a View. Theoretical Contributions to the Study of Argumentation, Dordrecht: Kluwer, pp. 213-226, 2003

Teaching methods

Lectures and seminars in full-time study; tutorials in part-time study; compulsory seminar participation is 75% in full-time study, compulsory tutorial participation is 50% in part-time study. Students who fail to meet the mandatory level of participation may be given during the semester additional study obligations (to the extent that will demonstrate academic achievement and acquired competencies necessary for successful completion of course).

Assessment methods

The course is terminated by credit awarded based proceeding of an academic essay .

Language of instruction

English

Further comments (probably available only in Czech)

The course can also be completed outside the examination period.
Information on the extent and intensity of the course: 6 hodin KS/semestr.

N_FLA Fundamentals of Legal Argumentation

Extent and Intensity

1/1. 3 credit(s). Type of Completion: z (credit).

Teacher(s)

JUDr. Petr Čechák, Ph.D. (seminar tutor)
prof. Dr. et Dr. Vladimír Robert Matas, MA, CSc. (seminar tutor)
PhDr. Ingrid Vichnarová (seminar tutor)

Guaranteed by

JUDr. Petr Čechák, Ph.D.
Department of Law – Departments – University of Finance and Administration
Contact Person: Olga Soušková

Timetable of Seminar Groups

N_FLA/cBSKPPPVPH: each odd Monday 15:45–16:29 S14, each odd Monday 16:30–17:15 S14, V. Matas
N_FLA/cKKV: each odd Thursday 12:15–12:59 KV308, each odd Thursday 13:00–13:45 KV308, I. Vichnarová
N_FLA/pBSKPPPVPH: each odd Monday 14:00–14:44 S14, each odd Monday 14:45–15:30 S14, V. Matas
N_FLA/pKKV: each even Thursday 12:15–12:59 KV308, each even Thursday 13:00–13:45 KV308, except Thu 23. 3. ; and Thu 9. 3. 14:00–15:30 KV308, I. Vichnarová
N_FLA/vBSKKV: Fri 17. 3. 15:45–17:15 KV308, Fri 31. 3. 15:45–17:15 KV204, Fri 21. 4. 14:00–15:30 KV308, I. Vichnarová
N_FLA/vBSKPH: Fri 3. 3. 17:30–19:00 S01, Fri 17. 3. 14:00–15:30 S01, 15:45–17:15 S01, V. Matas
N_FLA/vPPPVPH: Fri 3. 3. 19:15–20:45 S13, Sat 18. 3. 14:00–15:30 S14, 15:45–17:15 S14, P. Čechák

Prerequisites

There are no prerequisites for this course.

Course Enrolment Limitations

The course is offered to students of any study field.

Course objectives

The aim of the course is to make students familiar with the very concept of argumentation, functions of argumentation in relation to law and different methods of argumentation. The main objective of the course is to develop and cultivate practical skills directly related to legal argumentation and application of law. Particular argumentation methods should be just briefly outlined. The main emphasis of the course should be put on teaching students to use legal argumentation in practice. The course will be terminated by an academic essay dealing with some questions concerning either the theory or the practice of legal argumentation based on the topics presented in the course. By means of such an essay students should prove their concerning understanding. A satisfactory essay will be graded by a credit.

Syllabus

• (1) The Outline of a Theory of Legal Argumentation and the Concept of Law
• (2) Legal Argument Template
• (3) Problem of the Justification of Legal Decisions and the Topic Theory
• (4) Correctness of Normative Statements and the Morality of Law
• (5) General Practical Discourse
• (6) Legal Discourse as a Special Case
• (7) Perception and Persuasion in Legal Argumentation
• (8) Informal vs. Formal Fallacies and Cognitive Biases
• (9) The Correspondence Theory of Truth
• (10) Analogy vs. Argument from the Contrary (argumentum e contrario)
• (11) Argument from a Yet Stronger Reason (argumentum a fortiori) and Argument from Authority or an Appeal to Authority (argumentum ad verecundiam)
• (12) Argument (Reduction) to Absurdity (argumentum ad absurdum) and Proof by Contradiction

Literature

recommended literature
• ALEXY, R. A theory of legal argumentation: the theory of rational discourse as theory of legal justification. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010, ISBN-13: 978-0199584222

not specified
• Fuller, Lon L.: The Morality of Law. Yale University Press, 262 p., 1977
• Bertea, Stefano: Certainty, Reasonableness and Argumentation in Law. Argumentation, Volume 18, Issue 4, pp. 465–478, January 2004
• Feteris, Eveline: The Study of Legal Argumentation in Argumentation Theory and Legal Theory: Approaches and Developments. COGENCY Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 11-32, Summer 2011
• David, Marian: The Correspondence Theory of Truth. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2015.
• Hart, Herbert L. A.: The Concept of Law. Clarendon Press. Oxford. Oxford University Press; 315 p., 1961
• White, Nancy J.: Simple Steps: Teaching Legal Argumentation Using the Legal Argument Template. Journal of Legal Studies in Business, pp. 1-43, 2010
• Radbruch, Gustav: Statutory Lawlessness and Supra-Statutory Law. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 26, No. 1 (2006), pp. 1–11
• Bernall, Carlos: Legal Argumentation and the Normativity of Legal Norms. COGENCY Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 53-66, Summer 2011
• Clements, Cory S.: Perception and Persuasion in Legal Argumentation: Using Informal Fallacies and Cognitive Biases to Win the War of Words. BYU L. Rev. 319, 2013
• Bertea, Stefano: Legal Argumentation Theory and the Concept of Law. F.H. van Eemeren, et al. (eds.), Anyone Who Has a View. Theoretical Contributions to the Study of Argumentation, Dordrecht: Kluwer, pp. 213-226, 2003

Teaching methods

Lectures and seminars in full-time study; tutorials in part-time study; compulsory seminar participation is 75% in full-time study, compulsory tutorial participation is 50% in part-time study. Students who fail to meet the mandatory level of participation may be given during the semester additional study obligations (to the extent that will demonstrate academic achievement and acquired competencies necessary for successful completion of course).

Assessment methods

The course is terminated by credit awarded based proceeding of an academic essay .

Language of instruction

English

Further comments (probably available only in Czech)

The course can also be completed outside the examination period.
Information on the extent and intensity of the course: 6 hodin KS/semestr.

N_FLA Fundamentals of Legal Argumentation

The course is not taught in Summer 2016

Extent and Intensity

1/1. 3 credit(s). Type of Completion: z (credit).

Guaranteed by

JUDr. Petr Čechák, Ph.D.
Department of Law – Departments – University of Finance and Administration

Course Enrolment Limitations

The course is offered to students of any study field.

Language of instruction

English

Further comments (probably available only in Czech)

The course can also be completed outside the examination period.
Information on the extent and intensity of the course: 6 hodin KS/semestr.

• Enrolment Statistics (recent)