1. Methods of interpretation Joanna Helios Wioletta Jedlecka LLB

2. The principles and rules of interpretation of legal provisions The principles and rules of interpretation of legal provisions are specific interpretation directives, the application of which enables the reconstruction of the standard of conduct from the legal provision in which it is expressed. They are very diverse. They are of different origin, non – identical level of formalization and detail, they are binding to various degrees in practice and they serve different purposes.

3. European Union and methods of interpretation However, following accession to the European Union, lawyers from the new member states need to change their approach and maintain vigilance with respect to the interpretation of European Union law and the internal law based on EU law, because the adjustment of some interpretation habits has become necessary. It is no longer possible to automatically apply identical rules in all cases.

4. European Union and methods of interpretation The internal law related to EU law is interpreted primarily with the consideration of its purpose and not literal interpretation, which for the Continental lawyer, who is strongly attached to linguistic, literal interpretation, means changing the assumptions on which his reasoning was based.

5. Interpretation and theory and philosophy of law When describing interpretation processes, law theoreticians- because of different assumptions accepted (including philosophical assumptions) – present different concepts (visions) of the interpretation of the law, although the catalogues of principles and rules themselves are generally very similar.

6. Interpretation and legal system The interpretation of legal provisions is often an element adding dynamism to the system of law. Changes in social life result not only in changes in legal provisions, but also in changes in their interpretation. The specific legal system (concrete legal system) transforms itself not only as a result of transformations in legislations, but also as a consequence of changes in the interpretation of provisions.

7. The notion of interpretation of the law A set of interpretation activities performed in accordance with specific rules, together with the outcome of these activities, is referred to as the interpretation. The interpretation can be abstract, i.e. it can explain crucial legal doubts, but without reference to a specific, individual case (for example precedent de facto).

8. Interpretation of the law and courts Interpretation is also performed in the course of settling specific court and administrative cases, as well as during current business and organizational activities of other subjects of the law, by legal advisors and advocates who advise entrepreneurs, civil servants, etc.

9. Formal interpretation An interpretation performed by state authorities (including in the European Union, also the European Court of Justice) is referred to as formal interpretation. This interpretation can be binding upon various categories of entities (it has binding force), and who is bound and to what extent is defined by the laws of specific states (and EU law – for example prejudicial decisions).

10. Types of interpretation of the law The following are distinguished from the point of view of entities performing the interpretation: Authentic interpretation; Legal interpretation; Operational interpretation; Doctrinal interpretation; Unofficial interpretation.

11. Authentic interpretation Performed by the legislator for example legal definition.

12. Legal interpretation Performed by the authority to which the legislator granted competence for interpreting the law.

13. Operational interpretation Performed by the authority applying the law (the court or administrative authority).

14. Doctrinal interpretation Performed by legal science.

15. Unofficial interpretation Performed by the lawyers for the purposes of decision – making by various entities (a lawyer as an advisor at a company).

16. Phases of the process of interpreting legal provisions The interpretation starts by finding all the necessary elements of the legal norm in the material of legal provisions. Then, the legislator reconstructs the legal norm and identifies its explicit wording, using linguistic, systematic and functional methods of interpretation of the law. The purpose of this last phase is to determine the meaning of the individual words and phrases, such that only one meaning can be assigned to them.

17. „unclear linguistic terms” In the case of unclear linguistic terms, it is necessary to determine whether the ambiguous nature is intentional or it arises from an omission on the part of the legislator (intentional or accidental decision – making margin). If the unclear nature is intentional, the interpreter can remove it adequately to the specific decision – making situation. If it arises from an editorial omission, the interpreter eliminates it by reference to the axiological legislator’s assumptions.

18. Methods of interpretation of the law Linguistic, Grammatical or literal interpretation Systematic or contextual interpretation Teleological or functional interpretation

19. Literal / linguistic interpretation Law consist of text. An interpretation texts involves finding out what they mean. The literal interpretation is therefore the starting point of any interpretation, „Community” law is no exception.

20. Linguistic interpretation and European Union Law The problem specific to UE law consists in the fact that texts that need interpreting – primary law, secondary law, international agreements with Community involment – are written not in one or two, but in all official languages.

21. Linguistic interpretation When performing a linguistic interpretation of strictly internal law (having no sources in EU law), we check whether the term subject to interpretation has not been defined by the legislator (in the provision including the legal definition), whether there is a binding interpretation decision of any authority (for example the Supreme Court), or whether there is a uniform position of the doctrine and the meaning indicated in the literature can be accepted.

22. Linguistic interpretation If the answers to the above questions are negative, we determine the meaning on our own, using knowledge of language and logic. Dictionaries can prove helpful in practice.

23. Systematic interpretation Systematic interpretation can also have a general and a special meaning. The general meaning is well known and refers to the role attributed to the external and internal legal system as well as to the manner of connecting and harmonizing these two systems if incompatibilities exist between them. The latter case already deals with a special meaning that is typical of individual legal fields. The case behind it refers to the fact that the constitutional interpretation must also consider the “spirit” and the sense reigning in individual legal fields.

24. Systematic interpretation When performing a systematic interpretation, we check the consistency in understanding the norm against the wording of other norms in internal law, consider the position of the norm in the law – making instrument, the branch of law and its compliance with the principles of law.

25. Systematic interpretation We select such a meaning of the norm, which is consistent with other norms in the system of the law to the greatest possible extent.

26. Functional / teleological interpretation When performing a functional interpretation, we identify the purposes of the provision and select the meaning of the norm that best fulfils this purpose.

27. Definition of Teleological Interpretation The method of teleological interpretation may be defined as the method of interpretation used by courts, when they interpret legislative provisions in the light of the purpose, values, legal, social and economical goals these provisions aim to achieve. European national constitutional courts as well as the European Court of Human Rights apply this method. It is also considered to be the method of interpretation utilized most by the European Court of Justice (ECJ). In the EU legal order teleological interpretation is of significant importance. According to General Advocate Miguel Poiares Maduro “ Teleological interpretation in EU law does not refer exclusively to a purpose driven interpretation of the relevant legal rules. It refers to a particular systemic understanding of the EU legal order that permeates the interpretation of all its rules”.

28. Application of teleological interpretation by the European Court of Justice The ECJ uses teleological interpretation seeking to achieve the objectives set by the Treaties, specially the one of greater integration. The Court does so by taking into account not only the teleological interpretation of a single provision but its teleological interpretation in the whole context of EU legal order.

29. The ECJ also pointed out, that when beginning to interpret community law, it must be borne in mind that Community legislation is drafted in several languages and that the different language versions are all equally authentic. So a further reason that the ECJ applies teleological interpretation is to exclude any misconception in the texts of different but equivalent languages within the EU.

30. ECJ's cases with the application of teleological interpretation In the “CILFIT case” the ECJ affirmed that “every provision of Community law must be placed in its context and interpreted in the light of the provisions of E.C. law as a whole, regard being had to the objectives thereof and to its state of evolution at the date on which the provision in question is to be applied.”

31. Teleological / Functional interpretation Another case that states the application of teleological interpretation by the ECJ, is the van Gend en Loos case (C-26/62). In this case the ECJ established the principle of direct effect of Treaties in the legal order of the Member States. The outcome of the case was that the national judge should take into consideration that no statutory implementation act was needed by his State to apply the Treaty of Rome. In this case the ECJ based its reasoning in the teleological interpretation of the Treaty.

32. Interpretation of European Union Law Community instruments should be interpreted in such a way as to fulfil the purposes of the EU regulations (obviously, if any community norms exist in this respect). Functional, rather than linguistic interpretation has priority.

33. Interpretation of European Union Law The sequence in which directives are applied in the European Union member states depends on whether the legal regulation has a strictly internal nature (in such a case, the law is interpreted firstly linguistically, then systematically and functionally), or it is an internal law based on EU norm, or the EU law is applied directly (in such a case, the functional interpretation has priority).

34. A prejudicial decision In the event of doubts regarding the interpretation of EU law – the court stays the proceedings and turns to the European Court of Justice to issue a prejudicial decision, which will contain a binding interpretation.