| Abstract [eng] |
The object of study of this thesis is provided insight into the legal interdimensionality of the concept, which influences the perception of the decision-making process.The analysis of the knowledge of legal and judicial decisions. This master thesis examines the modern approach to law, because interdisciplinarity is promoted, dialogue between different sciences and the law itself begins to perceive differently. Moreover, judicial decisions are distinguished by the fact that the quality of the legal system often depends on judgments made by judges. This work reviews the two grand theories of judging – legal realism and legal formalism – which have their differences set around the importance of legal rules. Also this work reviews the interdisciplinary dialogue between economics and law, neuroscience and law, examines several fundamental insights of neuroscience on decision-making and judicial decision-making, and seeks to answer the question how the judicial decision-making is impacted by heuristic and bias and how this process can be improved. This master thesis argues that judges usually can make decisions on other grounds than formal legal rules and then use formal legal rules merely to justify those decisions. Also, judges will have preference for intuitive decision-making over rule-based and logical reasoning. When judges make decisions on other grounds than formal legal rules, judicial creativity is unlikely to be constrained by these formal rules. |
