The term „legal effect” is used colloquially and differently in case law. Colloquially, one can perhaps refer extensively to the effects of law on society, but in law it has a very specific meaning. Some concrete examples illustrate its importance in the legal context: the legal effect thus considered consists not only of acts of oral legal discourse (e.g. declaration), but also of written legal acts (e.g. decrees). While an act of written or performative discourse may seem a contradiction in terms, modern law consists of both unwritten and written performatives. While oral performatives are directly integrated into the context in which they were pronounced, written performatives (like most texts) survive well beyond the moment of inscription and are therefore developed in time and space. This instantiation in time and space makes the context of paramount importance and interpretation in the light of the context the hallmark of positive law, which requires particular attention to the basic knowledge implicit in play. It appears that the literature on speech act theory has so far focused neither on written speech acts nor on the contextual information necessary to understand a speech act.7 While the direct circumstances in which an act of speech is delivered are clear, as is the case with most oral communications, Contextual information (common context or implicit knowledge) usually does not need to be explicitly specified. However, because of the affordances of the written text, this must be made explicit, especially in the law. These affordances take into account the complexity of modern positive law and the nature of legal effect, which is a necessary condition of the law and thus constitutes the backbone of legal protection.
The legal effect is also decisive for the establishment of the powers to balance the rule of 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.
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. 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. The consequence of a legally relevant fact attributed by positive law is a change in the legal status of a legal person, including a change in its legal powers, rights or obligations: the legal effect of car theft means that one becomes punishable if the legal conditions for theft are fulfilled 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 current mode of existence of the law, which is then properly conceived, consists of a dynamic set of acts of speech.4 As the above-mentioned working definition has shown, a certain legal effect is attributed when certain legal conditions are manifestly met, but this is obviously not always easy: almost nothing in the law is as simple as an individual with legal power. pronounces a statement in the first person singular such as „I pronounce you partners”. is attributed to the legal effect, which takes effect immediately. Part of the complexity is also due to the fact that speech act theory was developed in the context of oral speech rather than the written text, whereas the law was traditionally text-oriented. However, „language” can and is used in some of the philosophical literature on speech act theory to encompass more than language in the traditional oral sense. Let`s move on to some examples to see how the legal effect can be defined as the performative effect of a series of acts that are considered acts of speech: a legislator enacting a rule on the legal effect of entering into contracts, followed by two parties entering into a contractual agreement on the sale and purchase of a car. If one of the parties then claims that the contractual terms have been violated, for example because the seller does not comply with his part of the contract and the car is not in the agreed state or does not meet the requirements discussed, then the injured party claims in court that the other party has violated the contract in any way and is liable for damages, followed by the court, which decides the case.5 Personal property. This word was considered broader than the word „goods” because it includes furniture that does not include „goods”. Bank v. Byram, 131,111.
92, 22 N. E. 812.In wills. The word „titles” is synonymous with „property” or „worldly substance” and, when used in simplified terms, such as in a gift of „all my belongings,” will bear all personal property. Hrsg. Jr. 507; Neighborhood, protocol. 209. The addition of the words „real and personal” extends to all property and personal property of the deceased. Ho- gan v. Jackson, Cowp.
304; L`Aljiena (D. C.) 7 Fed. 301. It is a word often found in wills, and since it is synonymous with „property” or „worldly substance,” its power depends heavily on the combination of the adjectives „real” and „personal.” „Movable and immovable effects” would encompass the entire property; But the word „effects” alone must simply be limited to personal succession, unless there is an apparent intention to the contrary. Scliouler, Wills, Legal effect in text-driven law thus offers legal protection „by design” 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 this is crucial to our objectives, this act offers protection by its very nature as a written act.