tkira26's diary

吉良貴之＠法哲学のブログ。

ホーフェルド一覧

※ まだメモなので不完全です。

1. 法哲学

A. 基本文献

 

B. 概説

 

C. ホーフェルド図式の分析

 

D. 権利論

 

E. 法実証主義との関連

 

F. 自然法論との関連

 

2. 政治哲学 (Political Philosophy)

 

A. 共和主義

B. 自由と権利

 

3. 形式論理・義務論理

A. ホーフェルド図式の論理分析

 

4. 日本語文献

  • 亀本洋 (2010). 「ホーフェルド図式の意味と意義」『法学論叢』166巻6号、68–93 頁。
  • 亀本洋 (2011). 『法哲学』成文堂。［第3章「法律関係」は亀本 (2010) の改訂］
  • 亀本洋 (2017). 「法律関係論と権利論」『法学論叢』180巻5・6号、88-124頁。
  • 亀本洋 (2018). 「Claimについて」『法律論叢』90巻2-3号、165-187頁。
  • 亀本洋 (2019a). 「法における自由について」『法律論叢』91巻6号、99-120頁。
  • 亀本洋 (2019b). 「サーモンドの権利概念論とホーフェルドの法律関係論」『法律論叢』92巻1号、131-156頁。
  • 佐藤遼 (2018). 『法律関係論における権能』成文堂。
  • 高柳賢三 (1948). 『英米の法律思潮』海口書店（高柳賢三 (1940). 「権利思想のある展開 (1)(2完)」『国家学会雑誌』5号、6号を再録）。
  • 三本卓也 (2011-13). 「ホーフェルドの義務と特権・自由 (1)(2)(3完)」『立命館法学』335、348、349号。
  • 三本卓也 (2010).  ｢批判法学によるホーフェルド解釈」、仲正昌樹編『叢書アレテイア 近代法とその限界』御茶の水書房。
  • 三本卓也 (2007). 「ホーフェルドと義務論理――ウリクトとの比較を通じて」『法哲学年報 2006』150-157頁。

 

5. 歴史的背景と発展

A. ホーフェルド前後の権利論

  • Salmond, John W. (1902). Jurisprudence. Sweet & Maxwell.
  • Kocourek, Albert (1927). Jural Relations. Bobbs-Merrill.
  • Llewellyn, Karl (1962). Jurisprudence: Realism in Theory and Practice. University of Chicago Press. [Llewellyn's appreciation of Hohfeld]
  • Balkin, Jack M. (1990). "The Hohfeldian Approach to Law and Semiotics." University of Miami Law Review, 44(1119).
  • Frydrych, David (2018). "Hohfeld vs. the legal realists." Legal Theory, 24(4), 291–344.

 

6. 私法

A. 物権法・所有権論

 

B. 契約法

 

C. 不法行為法、法と経済学

 

7. 公法、新領域法

A. 憲法・行政法、刑法

B. 国際法

 

C. 環境法

 

D. 動物法・動物権利論

 

E. 人工知能、大規模言語モデル等への応用

 

メモ：Singer (1982) によるリスト

  • Langdell, C. C. (1900). Classification of rights and wrongs (Pts. 1–2). Harvard Law Review, 13(6–7), 537, 659.
  • Terry, H. T. (1903). Legal duties and rights. Yale Law Journal, 12(3), 185–192.
  • Terry, H. T. (1914). Proximate consequences in the law of torts. Harvard Law Review, 28(1), 10–26.
  • Terry, H. T. (1917). The arrangement of the law (Pts. 1–2). Columbia Law Review, 17(4), 291, 365.
  • Terry, H. T. (1920). Arrangement of the law. Illinois Law Review, 15(1), 61–69.
  • Terry, H. T. (1924). Duties, rights, and wrongs. American Bar Association Journal, 10(2), 123–125.
  • Pound, R. (1909). Liberty of contract. Yale Law Journal, 18(6), 454–487.
  • Pound, R. (1915). Legal rights. International Journal of Ethics, 26(1), 92–106.
  • Pound, R. (1927). The progress of the law: Analytical jurisprudence, 1914–27. Harvard Law Review, 41(2), 174–192.
  • Pound, R. (1937). Fifty years of jurisprudence. Harvard Law Review, 50(4), 557–582.
  • Bingham, T. (1913). The nature of legal rights and duties. Michigan Law Review, 12(1), 1–32.
  • Hohfeld, W. N. (1917). Some fundamental conceptions as applied in judicial reasoning. Yale Law Journal, 26(8), 710–770.
  • Hohfeld, W. N. (n. d.). Legal conceptions. 
  • Corbin, A. L. (1917). Offer, acceptance, and some of the resulting legal relations. Yale Law Journal, 26(2), 169–187.
  • Corbin, A. L. (1921). Jural relations and their classification. Yale Law Journal, 30(3), 226–236.
  • Corbin, A. L. (1921). Terminology and classification in fundamental jural relations. American Law School Review, 4(4), 607–610.
  • Corbin, A. L. (1922). What is a legal relation? Illinois Law Quarterly, 5(2), 50–73.
  • Corbin, A. L. (1924). Rights and duties. Yale Law Journal, 33(4), 501–515.
  • Corbin, A. L. (1938). Legal analysis and terminology. In J. Hall (Ed.), Readings in jurisprudence (pp. 471–485).
  • Cook, W. W. (1919). Hohfeld's contributions to the science of law. Yale Law Journal, 28(8), 721–739.
  • Cook, W. W. (n. d.). Labor unions. Yale Law Journal.
  • Cook, W. W. (n. d.). Readings. Yale Law Journal.
  • Kocourek, A. (1920). The Hohfeld system of fundamental legal conceptions. Illinois Law Review, 15(1), 24–36.
  • Kocourek, A. (1920). Plurality of advantage and disadvantage in jural relations. Michigan Law Review, 19(1), 47–58.
  • Kocourek, A. (1920). Rights in rem. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 68(4), 322–333.
  • Kocourek, A. (1920). Various Definitions of Jural Relation. Columbia Law Review, 20(4), 394–404.
  • Kocourek, A. (1920). What is liberty? Illinois Law Review, 15(4), 347–355.
  • Kocourek, A. (1921). Classification of jural interrelations. Boston University Law Review, 1(2), 208–215.
  • Kocourek, A. (1921). Polarized and unpolarized legal relations. Kentucky Law Journal, 9(2), 131–139.
  • Kocourek, A. (1921). Reply to paper of Professor Corbin. American Law School Review, 4(4), 614–617.
  • Kocourek, A. (1921). Tabulae minores jurisprudentiae. Yale Law Journal, 30(4), 215–221.
  • Kocourek, A. (1922). Non-legal content relations. Illinois Law Quarterly, 4(2), 233–242.
  • Kocourek, A. (1923). Basic jural relations. Illinois Law Review, 17(4), 515–522.
  • Kocourek, A. (1923). Non-legal content relations revisited. Illinois Law Quarterly, 5(2), 150–155.
  • Kocourek, A. (1923). Wanted: A lawyer's phrase for legal capabilities and constraints. American Bar Association Journal, 9(1), 25–27.
  • Kocourek, A. (1924). Juristic knots and nots. Illinois Law Review, 19(1), 80–98.
  • Kocourek, A. (1925). Acts. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 73(3), 335–351.
  • Kocourek, A. (1925). Attribution of physical qualities to legal relations (Pts. 1–2). Illinois Law Review, 19(5–6), 435, 542.
  • Kocourek, A. (1921). Nomic and anomic relations. Cornell Law Quarterly, 7(1), 11–19.
  • Kocourek, A. (1937). The century of analytic jurisprudence since John Austin. In Law: A Century of Progress, 1835–1935 (Vol. 2, pp. 195–209).
  • Kocourek, A. (1938). The alphabet of legal relations. In J. Hall (Ed.), Readings in jurisprudence (pp. 509–515).
  • Harno, A. J. (1920). Tort-relations. Yale Law Journal, 30(2), 145–154.
  • Page, F. J. (1921). Terminology and classification in fundamental jural relations. American Law School Review, 4(4), 616–618.
  • Gobel, J. W. (1921). Affirmative and negative legal relations. Illinois Law Quarterly, 4(1), 94–113.
  • Gobel, J. W. (1922). Negative legal relations reexamined. Illinois Law Quarterly, 5(1), 36–49.
  • Gobel, J. W. (1924). Terms for restating the law. American Bar Association Journal, 10(1), 58–60.
  • Gobel, J. W. (1928). The sanction of a duty. Yale Law Journal, 37(3), 426–439.
  • Gobel, J. W. (1938). A redefinition of basic legal terms. In J. Hall (Ed.), Readings in jurisprudence (pp. 516–528).
  • Clark, E. C. (1922). Relations, legal and otherwise. Illinois Law Quarterly, 5(1), 26–47.
  • Green, L. C. (1923). The relativity of legal relations. Illinois Law Quarterly, 5(3), 187–200.
  • Husik, I. (1924). Hohfeld's jurisprudence. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 72(4), 263–276.
  • Randall, H. K. (1925). Hohfeld on jurisprudence. Law Quarterly Review, 41(1), 86–99.
  • Dowdall, H. M. (1926). The present state of analytical jurisprudence. Law Quarterly Review, 42(4), 451–465.
  • De Slooveere, P. (1929). Analytical jurisprudence as related to modern legal methods. New York University Law Quarterly Review, 9(4), 407–420.
  • Allen, C. K. (1931). Legal duties. Yale Law Journal, 40(4), 331–351.
  • Dainow, J. (1934). The science of law: Hohfeld and Kocourek. Canadian Bar Review, 12(3), 265–278.
  • Radin, M. (1938). A restatement of Hohfeld. In J. Hall (Ed.), Readings in jurisprudence (pp. 501–508). (Originally published in Harvard Law Review, 51, 1141–1153.)
  • Hart, H. L. A. (1954). Definition and theory in jurisprudence. Law Quarterly Review, 70(1), 37–60.
  • Hart, H. L. A. (1972). Bentham on legal powers. Yale Law Journal, 81(4), 799–824. 
  • [Essays on Bentham, chap. 8]
  • Hart, H. L. A. (1973). Bentham and the de-mystification of the law. Modern Law Review, 36(1), 2–22. [Essays on Bentham, chap. 1]
  • Hart, H. L. A. (1973). Bentham on legal rights. In A. Simpson (Ed.), Oxford Essays in Jurisprudence (pp. 171–190).  [Essays on Bentham, chap. 7]
  • Hart, H. L. A. (1974). Bentham. In B. Parekh (Ed.), Jeremy Bentham: Ten Critical Essays (pp. 73–89).
  • Hart, H. L. A. (1976). Bentham and the United States of America. Journal of Law and Economics, 19(3), 547–564. [Essays on Bentham, introduction]
  • Patterson, E. W. (1945). Bentham on the nature and method of law. California Law Review, 33(5), 612–628.
  • Williams, G. L. (1968). The concept of legal liberty. In R. Summers (Ed.), Essays in legal philosophy (pp. 121–138). (Originally published in Columbia Law Review, 56, 1129–1143.)
  • Dickey, J. (1971). Hohfeld's debt to Salmond. University of Western Australia Law Review, 10(1), 59–70.
  • Lyons, D. (1972). Logic and coercion in Bentham's theory of law. Cornell Law Review, 57(3), 335–357.
  • James, L. (1973). Bentham and legal theory. Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly, 24(3), 267–282.
  • James, L. (1973). Bentham on the individuation of laws. Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly, 24(4), 357–369.
  • Lysaght, C. B. (1973). Bentham on the aspects of a law. Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly, 24(4), 383–389.