CONSIDERATIONS ON THE IMPORTANCE OF LAW AND JURIDICAL CUSTOM, AS FORMAL LAW SOURCES
CONSIDERATIONS ON THE IMPORTANCE OF LAW AND JURIDICAL CUSTOM, AS FORMAL LAW SOURCES

Summary/Abstract: The past and the present of the law sources highlight the fact that the importance of certain law sources was smaller or greater, at a certain point in time, and that some categories of law sources are at present perceived as participating in the formation of the juridical norms in some states, but not in others (namely legislation and custom, respectively jurisprudence, as law sources)1.The classical distinction between four formal law sources, namely custom, legislation, jurisprudence and doctrine, can be noticed to correspond to some modes of direct and indirect law formation. In certain cases, the rule of law is but the result of the behaviors, decisions or opinions that did not have as their object the creation of general and abstract rules. The rule did not come out of them but fortuitously and progressively, due to a logical reasoning that has led to grasping and formulating it. Thus, custom comes out of deeds, jurisprudence springs from judicial decisions, doctrine comes from authors. In other cases, law results from deliberate acts whose object is to establish norms having a determined content and a precise formulation. This is a direct mode of law formation, corresponding to written sources, legislation being often considered in certain law systems as the main, even the only law source. It is consecrated there in the name of the state, as expression of the general will2.Law sources have an important role in consolidating legislation in the rule of law. All the law sources analyzed previously directly depend on the theoretical level of their knowledge and the quality of the judicial practice; they reflect, however, at the same time, the deep transformations of the society, first of all of the state structures in charge with the elaboration of the juridical norms3.

• Details
• Contents