Application And Improvement Of Legal Interpretation Methods In Guiding Cases

As one of the guiding cases in China’s judicial system,the goal is to achieve“same case and same sentence,uniform application of law”.The realization of the above goals must be based on the formation of guiding cases.Because judges in judicial practice have different understandings of statutory laws and regulations,which will hinder the realization of the goal of “co-judgment,uniform law application”,the guiding case will play a guiding role in making referee’s Standardize understanding.Through careful analysis of the guiding case,it can be found that the legal interpretation method has rich practice in the case.Guiding cases and judicial interpretations are both forms of the Supreme Court’s exercise of the power of legal interpretation.On the one hand,various types of normative documents require“case-to-case interpretation”,and on the other hand,because the basic case has been selected as a guiding case,legal interpretation methods have been applied.It can be seen that there is a relationship between the legal interpretation method and the guiding case,and it can be seen that the nature of the guiding case is:case explanation,which uses the case as a carrier to explain the application of statutory norms that have problems in judicial practice.In order for the guiding case to maximize its own functional value,it is critical to analyze the applicable interpretation method and the theoretical interpretation method of system,purpose,and history.Therefore,based on the firstpart,the second part and the third part of the article will focus on the application of the interpretation method and the existing problems,and the fourth part proposes perfect measures for the existing problems.The second part focuses on the method of interpretation.Firstly,the application of the semantic interpretation method is analyzed.It can be seen that the application of the Chinese interpretation method in the guiding case mainly manifests in“legal regulations”.Secondly,it analyzes why the application of the semantic interpretation method has priority.Finally,based on the foregoing research,it is found that the problems in the application of the semantic interpretation method are mainly:first,the complex legal relationship between statutory norms and case facts cannot be explained due to functional limitations;second,the statutory norms involved in“legal provisions”Unknown pointing.The third part focuses on the theoretical explanation method.The first is the analysis of the applicability of the system interpretation method.The application of the system interpretation method can find loopholes in statutory laws on the one hand and clarify the meaning of legal concepts on the other.However,the application of the system interpretation method has problems such as method dependence and closed system.The second is that the referees have their own subjective judgments on the method of interpretation of the applicable purpose,so the basis for determining the interpretation of the purpose is theprerequisite of application.Once again,if the Supreme Court is regarded as a legislator in the substantive sense,the act of re-compilation of the communique case as a guiding case is a manifestation of the application of the historical interpretation method,but there is a problem of repeated publication.Finally,due to the difficult characteristics of the guiding case,the application of multiple interpretation methods becomes inevitable,but the coherent operation of the interpretation methods is based on a certain value judgment of the referee,which means that the referee may appear to make arbitrary decisions.The fourth part is the improvement measures.The first is to increase the applicable proportion of theoretical explanation methods.The second is to use the system interpretation method to integrate the application of other interpretation methods.Third,the system explanation adheres to the broad sense of“closedness”.The fourth is based on the purpose of legislation and judicial policy.The fifth is to sort out the cases of the communique that still have a guiding role.Six is a coherent rule of legal interpretation.