Components of Legal Concepts: Quality of Law, Evaluative Judgement, and Metaphorical Framing of Article 8 ECHR

Abstract

This paper looks at the use of metaphor and its effect on the interpretation of the ‘quality of law’ in Art. 8 cases of the European Court of Human Rights. It demonstrates the Court's reproduction of specific metaphorical frames ‐ a finding consistent with the use of metaphor in judgment experiments in cognitive linguistics. The Court employs metaphors conceptually coherent with those used in their cited precedent, in their representation of the successful pleadings within their judgments and insists (implicitly) on different metaphors in dissent. This paper argues that the use of congruent metaphors may be indicative of metaphor as a contributing factor in how judges reason. In the least, it is a significantly understudied phenomenon and this paper provides evidence for the salience of its approach for understanding judicial reasoning.

Administrative discretion in states of full democracy and hybrid regime: the example of Germany and Ukraine

“…We would like to add that we agree with this author about the incorrectness of the opinion about law moral neutrality (some aspects of this provision will be revealed below). In the same context, we cannot but mention the study of Slosser (2019) on the use of metaphors as a reasoning factor in the European Court of Human Rights activities. "The act of metaphorical framing by the Court on evaluative judgment is quite clear, at least in terms of viewing it from the standpoint of justificatory hindsight" (Slosser 2019).…”

“…In the same context, we cannot but mention the study of Slosser (2019) on the use of metaphors as a reasoning factor in the European Court of Human Rights activities. "The act of metaphorical framing by the Court on evaluative judgment is quite clear, at least in terms of viewing it from the standpoint of justificatory hindsight" (Slosser 2019).…”

Untitled

“…This may affect decisions on the liability of parties, the application of restrictions on freedom of expression or the protection of the interests of persons who may be subjected to an opinion (Karaman & Kozina 2015). This problem is only exacerbated by the metaphorical wording of some articles of the Convention (Slosser, 2019;Borzovic, 2022).…”

Does metaphorical framing influence the decision-making process in a judicial conflict? An empirical study on the case of surrogates

“…In this way, they can easily be used as frames which shed new light on well-known facts. And indeed, metaphoric language has been shown to be largely used and highly relevant in the judicial domain because metaphors can also help to make abstract legal concepts appear more concrete and to make legal matters clear, transparent, and understandable (Ebbesson, 2008;Hobbs, 2012;Laugerud, 2020;Slosser, 2018). As demonstrated in an analysis of courtroom speech (Campos-Pardillos, 2022), judges -although they are obliged to objectivity -use metaphors to characterize perpetrators and victims.…”