Talk:Purposive approach

Merge
I think this article is doubling up on Purposive theory. I would suggest to merge these articles and cross-reference.

Ernie (talk) 07:54, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

This article also seems to cover other methods of interpretation, so maybe this article should be renamed to something more general. 93.96.236.8 (talk) 17:31, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

If a merger is to take place, the better heading would be 'purposive rule' rather than 'purposive theory,' because normally one refers to interpretive rules rather than theories. For example: the 'literal rule', the 'golden rule', the 'mischief rule.' Courts in the UK in particular have self-consciously used the purposive rule to replace the prior practice, in which which courts would attempt to determine which of these three rules worked the best. Legal "theory" seems to me to refer more to overarching philosophies such as legal positivism and legal realism. La revanche des aubergines (talk) 15:35, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

There appears to be several interchangeable terms regarding purposivism including: approach, interpretation, doctrine, theory and rule. Israeli jurist Aharon Barak refers to it in his 2005 books as ‘purposive interpretation’. While Michael Zander refers to it as ‘purposive approach’. Should the two existing articles merge, the new article should have a title that recognizes the differing terminology, yet gives precedent to the most legitimate term.--Original Documents Canada (talk) 19:06, 17 May 2012 (UTC)