State the Legal Effects in Case

Legal effect in text-dictated law thus provides legal protection „by design of technology“ in two respects: first, it simply provides the protection provided by the legislation in question. If this law has no legal effect, it cannot be protected by law. A fundamental right is protected by law, for example an anti-discrimination law is enacted and therefore has legal effect – in this way, the law will contribute to protection against discrimination. Second, and crucially for our purposes, this legislation provides protection by its very nature as a written act. As such, it has certain affordances that it has because of its technological embodiment: text. The multi-interpretability of human language – embodied in the technological expressions of writing and printing – provides an ever-moving target for clarifying meaning. Meaning is constituted and reconstituted in its use, but instead of collapsing into a relativistic and subjectivist collection of „private languages“, it guides us stably and gives us the contestability that is at the heart of the rule of law. The legal effect, as conferred by the competent authorities and drawn from the sources of law, thus gives us the closure required by legal protection by technological design. We cannot assume that this kind of legal protection, guaranteed by the contestability of natural language and guaranteed by the separation of powers established by the rule of law, can be perfectly transferred to various technological incarnations in which law can be expressed. This means that the compensatory powers decisive for the rule of law must be referred to the possible new forms of existence of the law by means of legal protection through legal protection. Case law is a law based on judicial decisions and not on laws based on constitutions, statutes or regulations. Case law concerns single disputes that are settled by the courts on the basis of the concrete facts of a case.

In contrast, laws and regulations are written in an abstract manner. The legal effect of the conclusion of an actual contract generally consists in the attribution of two statutory contractual obligations for performance and two rights to that service. CONTRACT: In the event of insolvency, [ JAVIER et al ] assigns its H&L and transfers all rights of ownership and possession of the property The obligation of S expires if all the elements that are alternately the subject of the obligation are lost due to a fortuitous event. In that case, Article 1174 shall apply. Case law, which is also used interchangeably with the common law, refers to the set of precedents and powers established by previous court decisions on a particular subject or issue. In this sense, the case law differs from one jurisdiction to another. For example, a case in New York would not be decided with the California jurisdiction. Instead, New York courts will analyze the issue based on binding precedents.

If there are no previous decisions on the matter, New York courts could review precedents from another jurisdiction, which would be more of a persuasive authority than a binding authority. Other factors, such as the age of the decision and the proximity of the facts, influence the authority of a particular case at common law. While the legal effect is not the panacea for what modern law is or does, it could be characterized as its vanishing point and is at the heart of a hermeneutic understanding of law. This is what distinguishes law from other types of norms and is neither a question of raw fact nor a question of mechanical application.1 Therefore, it is one of the most important building blocks of what constitutes modern law, and it is what makes possible an architecture that structures society, since it guides people. as legal subjects, in our common institutional world. But to properly and clearly explain the notion of legal effect, it is crucial to situate where the real „effect“ lies in the current mode of existence of the law. To do this, we must turn to the theory of the act of speech, because „the nature of positive law implies the granting of legal effect when certain legal conditions apply, bearing in mind that such a legal consequence is the performative effect of a dedicated series of acts of speech consolidated in a dynamic corpus of legal texts“.2 Speech acts are acts that are performed on the basis of their enunciation: They do what they say. Such acts of „performative“ or „illocutionary“ discourse, as J.L. Austin called them, are not the cause of action, but represent that action. Performative acts can be compared to „constative“ or „locusionary“ acts, which are propositional or descriptive rather than performative. In any case, the legal effect is indeed a performative effect – it has real implications for the composition and constitution of our legal institutional world. Acts of performative discourse are therefore very closely linked to institutional facts, as opposed to raw facts, and are capable of creating our common institutional world.

Whether an act of speech has such a performative effect, however, crucially depends on a common context in a pragmatic understanding of the meaning of language. In this context, Wittgenstein`s idea of meaning as usage implies that the performative effect depends on „a common background consisting of hidden assumptions, mutual beliefs and a common practice that justifies the use and therefore the meaning of words and, more generally, human action“.6 This article states that the right to choose belongs to the creditor, but sets the rules followed. They determine the debtor`s responsibilities before the creditor`s choice is communicated to him. Speech acts reveal how language can not only describe our reality, but also constitute it. Austin himself stated at the beginning of his first William James lecture, a series of lectures that culminated in his seminal book How to Do Things with Words, that performatives might disguise themselves as factual assertions, but this was not the case. He says in a footnote: „Of all the people, lawyers should know the real situation best. Maybe there are a few now. Nevertheless, they will succumb to their own frightening fiction that a statement about „the law“ is a statement of fact.3 The fact that this distinction is of paramount importance to the law is also demonstrated by the fact that some of the most impressive examples in the literature on the theory of the act of speech, for example the pronunciation of a marriage („I declare you married“).

are of a legal nature. This is what the basic legal effect is: the legal effect is attributed to a performative – change in the legal powers or legal status of legal entities – when certain conditions are met, which may vary depending on the jurisdiction, for example from single to married. Our linguistic interaction creates linguistic artifacts that change our common institutional world, change our perception of that world, and change us in the process. Although during the first century of the nation`s existence, the Court referred to the wording of the preamble to interpret the Constitution, it does not appear that the Court ever gave legal weight to the preamble alone. Chief Justice John Jay, who served as a district judge, concluded that a preamble to a legal document cannot be used to overturn other texts contained therein. Instead, introductory language can be used to resolve two competing readings of the text.4Footnote Jones v. Walker, 13 F. Cas. 1059, 1065 (V.C.D. 1800) (Jay, C.J.) (A preamble cannot invalidate a provision; however, if it expresses the intention of the legislator and the form of the act, it allows us, in the case of two arrangements, to adopt the one that best suits its intention and design.) Similarly, Justice Joseph Story argued in his comments that while the preamble generally provides an opportunity to explain the nature, scope and application of the powers created by the Constitution, it can never be used to extend the powers vested in the general government or any of its departments.5See I Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States § 462 (1833).

The legal effect of car theft means that a person becomes liable to prosecution if the legal requirements for theft are met by an institution empowered to do so. This means that convicted persons may receive the penalties provided for by the substantive law of the court concerned for the offence, unless justified or excused. The consequence of a legally relevant situation to which positive law is attributed is a change in the legal status of a legal person, including a change in its legal powers, rights or obligations: the term „legal effect“ is used colloquially and differently in case law.