• A
  • A
  • A
  • ABC
  • ABC
  • ABC
  • А
  • А
  • А
  • А
  • А
Regular version of the site
Contacts

Address: 17 Promyshlennaya ul., room 305, 198099, Saint Petersburg

Phone/fax: (812) 785-25-40

Email: urdekanat@hse.spb.ru; gpipkaf@hse.spb.ru

Administration
Article
The Law of Mongols as Seen by John of Plano Carpini: Historical Legal Verification

Pochekaev R. Y.

Золотоордынское обозрение. 2022. Vol. 10. No. 1. P. 8-31.

Book chapter
From Supreme Judge to Arbitrator: Conflicts of Rus’ Princes under the Golden Horde Khans’ Trial (Case Studies)

Pochekaev R. Y.

In bk.: The Routledge Handbook of the Mongols and Central-Eastern Europe. L.: Routledge, 2021. Ch. 12. P. 249-266.

Working paper
Religion, Sexual Minorities and the Rule of Law in Russia: Mutual Challenges

Antonov M.

Political Science. PS. Высшая школа экономики, 2017. No. WP BRP 45/PS/2017 .

The Methodology of Judicial Decisions

2021/2022
Academic Year
ENG
Instruction in English
4
ECTS credits
Type:
Elective course
When:
4 year, 3 module

Instructor

Course Syllabus

Abstract

The main goal of this course is to introduce students to the key features of drafting judicial decisions, with the overview of the most important approaches to legal reasoning and legal interpretation
Learning Objectives

Learning Objectives

  • formation of the students' understanding of the essence and content of a court decision, main stages of its drafting, provide awareness of the significance of the judge’s profession and its role in modern society
  • formation in the students of the skills of legal thinking, argumentation and justification
  • introducing to the students the peculiarities of legal logic and teaching them the practical application of its tools
  • teaching students practical methods of interpreting legal norms and principles, overcoming gaps in legislation
  • developing students' basic skills of professional activity, ability to work with documents, competently use regulatory material
Expected Learning Outcomes

Expected Learning Outcomes

  • developing students' basic skills of professional activity, ability to work with documents, competently use regulatory material
  • formation in the students of the skills of legal thinking, argumentation and justification
  • formation of the students' understanding of the essence and content of a court decision, main stages of its drafting, provide awareness of the significance of the judge’s profession and its role in modern society
  • introducing to the students the peculiarities of legal logic and teaching them the practical application of its tools
  • teaching students practical methods of interpreting legal norms and principles, overcoming gaps in legislation
Course Contents

Course Contents

  • Introduction to the course "The methodology of judicial decisions". General methodology of judicial decision-making
  • The structure of a judicial decision
  • The general logic of a judicial decision
  • Resolving issues of fact in the process of drafting a judicial decision
  • Resolving issues of law in the process of drafting a judicial decision
  • Interpretation of law in the process of justifying judge’s opinion
  • Problems of drafting judicial decisions
Assessment Elements

Assessment Elements

  • non-blocking Homework: report+presentation
    Homework is performed in the third module. 1) The purpose of homework is to check the student’s skills to work competently with normative material, to present their opinions logically and reasonably. 2) Homework consists in drafting a court document (opinion) based on the assignment provided by the teacher, or in analyzing of a court document proposed by the teacher. Requirements for the form and content of the opinion are formulated by the instructor during the lectures and in the framework of work on seminars. At a special lesson, the document must be presented in the form of an oral report and answers to the questions. Oral presentation is done in English, total duration 10 minutes. You are free to use powerpoint presentations or not, but the narrative should be comprehensive for everyone. 3) The wordage of homework - up to 20,000 signs (TNR 12, including spaces and punctuation marks). 4) Homework is performed in writing outside the classroom and is delivered to the teacher in a pre-announced time frame (till the end of the seminars). The overall grade (on a 10-point scale) for the homework is given as a sum of grades for 2 parts: written and oral parts.
  • non-blocking Exam
    The exam is held in the third module. 1) The purpose of the exam is to check students' knowledge of the discussed topics, their ability to perform the tasks accurately, to draw up court decisions on various categories of cases, their knowledge of relevant legal terminology and skills in working with legal texts. 2) The exam consists of two tasks: 1) identifying the subject and problems of the legal document proposed by the instructor, analyzing this document, proposing own solution to the issue to which the document is dedicated; 2) preparation of a judicial document (or part thereof) on the proposed issues. 3) The student must fulfill these tasks competently and logically. The exam is held in writing. 4) The exam is held within 60 minutes. The overall grade (on a 10-point scale) for the exam is given as a sum of grades for 2 tasks.
  • non-blocking in-class participation
    In-class discussions will be evaluated during seminars based on students’ activity and substantial contribution to the class.
Interim Assessment

Interim Assessment

  • 2021/2022 3rd module
    The final grade is calculated as follows: O final = 0.2 * O homework + 0.4 * O in-class + 0.6 * O exam O homework – max score is 10 O in-class – max score is 5 O exam – max score is 10
Bibliography

Bibliography

Recommended Core Bibliography

  • Popkin, W. D. (2007). Evolution of the Judicial Opinion : Institutional and Individual Styles. New York: NYU Press. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsebk&AN=219457
  • Posner, R. A. (2017). Legal Research and Practical Experience. University of Chicago Law Review, 84(1), 239–248. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=asn&AN=123123530

Recommended Additional Bibliography

  • Frost, M. H. (2016). Introduction to Classical Legal Rhetoric : A Lost Heritage. London: Routledge. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsebk&AN=1480745
  • Relis, T. (2009). Perceptions in Litigation and Mediation : Lawyers, Defendants, Plaintiffs, and Gendered Parties. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsebk&AN=273773