Yearly journal of scientific articles ďPravova derzhavaĒ Volume 33 (2022), 575-583 p.
Gavrilyuk Svetlana. General theoretical basis of legal error research (methodology issues)
In this article the author highlighted the successful results of theoretical analysis of scientifi c research on the investigation of legal error, analyzed the nature of such a legal phenomenon, identifi ed the main species and aspects to overcome legal errors.
The study revealed the main trends in the concept of legal error, which are embodied in specifi c results, especially the unpredictable consequence of a personís assessment of certain circumstances (including his actions), which he considered exclusively legitimate, however, which did not turn out to be the case. Our research has shown that error does not arise by itself, it is often the embodiment of misinterpretation, understanding of the content of the rule of law in the minds of the subject, the wrong form of fi xing information in it. Simultaneously, the attitude of legal scholars on the semantic meaning of the concept of ęerrorĽ in legal science are highlighted, which are quite ambiguous, and often leads to inconsistencies in the conceptual apparatus of modern assumption of law, and require comprehensive research.
Therefore, the disclosure of the content of legal errors, as well as fi nding methods to prevent such errors is one of the most important issues to improve legal practice in general and increase the effi cacy of legislation in particular. Furthermore, this article refl ects the main types of legal errors, and since the issue of modern domestic legal doctrine is poorly understood, special attention is paid to doctrinal legal errors. These errors refl ect the systemic and functional deviations of society and the state, and the legal doctrine in modern conditions is a fundamental basis for the legal development of society and the state. Moreover, we analyzed law-making, law-interpreting and lawenforcement errors.
Key words: defect, legal consciousness, incorrectness, legal error, doctrine, law enforcement process.
1. Dzyubak N. M. Pomylka yak obyekt naukovoho vyvchennya [Error as an object of scientifi c study]. Naukovi pratsi Kamíyanetsʹ-Podilʹsʹkoho natsionalʹnoho universytetu imeni Ivana Ohiyenka. Filolohichni nauky, 2014, 9-11, 9 [ukr]. 2. Platon. (1970). Sochineniya: v 3 t. [Works: in 3 vol.]. (Vol. 2). Moskva: Myslʹ , 339 [rus]. 3. Shakhnovich M. M., Epicur (2008). Antichnaya fi losofi ya: Entsiklopedicheskiy slovarí [Ancient Philosophy: Encyclopedic Dictionary]. Moskva: Progress-Traditsiya, 818 [rus]. 4. Holovatyy S. & Kozyubra M., Syroyid O. (2008). Antolohiya liberalizmu: polityko-pravnychi vchennya ta verkhovenstvo prava [Anthology of liberalism: political and legal doctrines and the rule of law]. Kyiv: Upor, 288, 494 [ukr]. 5. Yevhrafova Ye. P. Praktyka vypravlennia zakonotvorchykh pomylok [The practice of correcting legislative errors]. Chasopys tsyvilínoho i kryminalínoho sudochynstva, 2016, 2 (29), 116 [ukr]. 6. Parkhomenko N. M. (2008). Dzherela prava: problemy teoriyi ta metodolohiyi. Monohrafi ya [Sources of law: problems of theory and methodology. Monograph]. Kyiv: Yurydychna dumka, 207 [ukr]. 7. Onischenko N. M. Do pytannia pro doktrynalíni iurydychni pomylky : pryroda ta shliakhy podolannia [On the question of doctrinal legal errors: the nature and ways to overcome]. Chasopys tsyvilínoho i kryminalínoho sudochynstva, 2016, 2 (29), 75Ė84, 79. [ukr]. 8. Onischenko N. M. Do pytannia pro doktrynalíni iurydychni pomylky : pryroda ta shliakhy podolannia [On the question of doctrinal legal errors: the nature and ways to overcome]. Chasopys tsyvilínoho i kryminalínoho sudochynstva, 2 (29), 78-79 [ukr].