PUNCTE DE VEDERE REFERITOARE LA CERCETAREA ŞI SCRIEREA JURIDICĂ
VIEWS ON LEGAL RESEARCH AND WRITING

Summary/Abstract: The rapid development of today's society gives rise to a wide range of problems that require research, funding and specific skills. Respectively, the science of law also claims its epistemological status, demonstrating an intensification of research, as a whole, and of the methodology of legal research and writing, in part. In this context, the management of legal research activity becomes all the more imperative as it leads to a creative end, to a legal product/legal writing, as well as to the development of thinking, analysis, synthesis, organisation, writing skills. The management of legal research activity can be carried out through four criteria: organisational (procedural: choice of research topic and time frame: time management), informational (general information, research of sources, processing and interpretation of ideas), decisional, methodological. Like most branches of legal science, the science of constitutional law uses both general and specific research methods in its research and development. As in any field, legal scientific research is based on the use of a methodology, a set of methods and procedures with which the study of law in all its complexity takes place. From the category of general methods widely used in the science of law, we list the following methods: comparative, sociological, historical etc. In the specific category we mention the following methods: logical, experimental, quantitative, prospective, etc. One legal research and writing tool, focused on thorough argumentation and brevity, that law students learn to apply effectively is the so-called IRAC method. The father of this method is considered Lon Fuller, one of the four most important American legal theorists of the last hundred years, says American research professor Robert Samuel Summers. The IRAC acronym can be deciphered as follows: the problem/question-problem (I), the rule of law (R), the argument/analysis (A) and the conclusion (C). This method of research and writing is based on inductive and deductive reasoning models in law. We recall that the IRAC methodology has acquired both allies and adversaries, which in turn fall into two categories: those who oppose the use of an IRAC because of its strict and unwieldy format and those who argue that the IRAC tends to lead to overwriting and oversimplification of the complexity of proper legal analysis.

• Details
• Contents