Teismų „interpretacinis žaismas“ ir jo doktrininės prielaidos

A practising lawyer is not always aware of the fact that case decisions are more determined by legal doctrine – attitudes of authoritative lawyers and scientific legal discussion of other forms – than by changes in positive law. Regulations of specific case decisions are directly reliant on the ideas and statements of legal discussions – as one of the factors influencing the decisions of the courts. During the twenty years of independence, the form, content and argumentation of the Lithuanian court judgments has fundamentally changed, especially with regard to the understanding of the courts (the judiciary) in terms of how unrestrained they are when interpreting a legal text and making decisions. The judicial discretion to interpret a legal text is treated diversely in various legal traditions and within the scope of the western legal tradition itself. In common law countries, the competence of a judge to deviate from a legal text or to create their own legal framework is treated with much greater understanding. In civil law tradition, the attempts of judges to take over the functions of the legislature are usually considered more critically. Even the representatives of comparative law emphasise that judges in civil law tradition countries tend to call the creation of legal rules differently – mostly as interpretation of the law. The discussion on the power of judges to create law through its interpretation has been taking place everywhere and at all times. Judicial discretion in decision-making is not due to individual factors such as era, social structure, cultural background, but is determined by some other factors that are not easy to identify. The interpretative activity of the courts is also influenced by the prevailing doctrinal regulations of judicial activity. It is the changes of the Lithuanian legal doctrines that could have encouraged the courts to determine the scope of their activity in the direction of its growth. [...]Straipsnyje analizuojama paskutiniais dviem dešimtmečiais formuluotos teisinės doktrinos įtaka realiai funkcionuojančiai teisei – šiuo atveju teismų aktyvumo apimčiai. Keliama prielaida, kad buvo sukurtos doktrininės prielaidos didelei teismų laisvei, teismams teikiant argumentus ir patiems nusistatant savo kompetencijos apimtį. Primenamos pagrindinės teismų aktyvumo formos. Atkreipiamas dėmesys į atskiras teismų laikysenos problemas – pasitaikantį spekuliatyvų argumentavimą, ilgai trunkančius procesus, besiformuojančią teisminę praktiką, teismams patiems nusistatant savo galių apimtį, teismų neveiklumą stabdant visuotinį tampantį piktnaudžiavimą procesinėmis priemonėmis. Siekiama išryškinti teisinės diskusijos, formuojančios teisinės doktrinos turinį, svarbą realiai funkcionuojančiai teisei