Comprehension
For a principle to be acceptable as a law, Lon Fuller states that it must be measured in terms of the following eight standards: (1) The principle must be expounded in a manner so that it can be generally applied. A pattern less ad hoc system of law lacks the desired “internal morality” which legal principles should possess. This proposition is comparable to the often-read statement that our government is a government of laws rather than men. (2) The mandates of the law must be communicated to the people to whom they are directed. (3) Newly announced principles of law, except on rare occasions, should be applied only in a prospective manner. Retroactive application of changes in prescribed norms, subject to the presence of compelling extenuating circumstances, should be avoided. (4) Standards of action and inaction should be clearly stated. Fuller concedes that the lawmaker cannot specify with absolute clarity exactly what is demanded of each individual in every instance when the law may affect him. He does, however, assert that the duty to clarify the law should be delegated to the enforcement bodies only to the extent that such action is required by the environment in which the law must operate. (5) Arguing that respect for the law calls for consistency, Fuller maintains that the originators of laws should take great pains to see that the body of law is as free as possible from contradictory mandates, (6) Emphasizing that law is tied to the capabilities of human beings, Fuller insists that those who prescribe the norms required of individuals must refrain from imposing impossible standards of action or inaction. A stated norm which demands an absurd course of action would violate Fuller’s idea of the “internal morality of law.” (7) While stare decisis, of recent date, has been viewed by some, if not many people, as a barrier on the pathways to needed change, Fuller is of the opinion that abiding by previously announced norms is desirable in and of itself. He finds that frequency of change, by its very nature, tends to have a deleterious impact upon the persons who are subjected to an abrupt alteration of the requirements which the law imposes upon them. (8) The student of American history is familiar with Andrew Jackson’s assertion to the effect that while the Supreme Court might render a judgment, it lacked the means by which it might be implemented.
[Extracted from Tucker, Edwin W. (1965) “The Morality of Law, by Lon L. Fuller,” Indiana Law Journal: Vol. 40: Iss. 2, Article5.]
[Extracted from Tucker, Edwin W. (1965) “The Morality of Law, by Lon L. Fuller,” Indiana Law Journal: Vol. 40: Iss. 2, Article5.]
Question: 1
What does Fuller refer to with the term “promulgation”?
What does Fuller refer to with the term “promulgation”?
Updated On: Sep 10, 2025
- The retroactive application of laws
- The consistent application of laws
- The clear communication of laws to those they affect
- The economic impact of laws
Hide Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is C
Solution and Explanation
Lon Fuller, a prominent legal philosopher, introduced eight requirements for a system to be considered a legal system with “internal morality.” One of these key principles is the clear communication of laws to the people affected by them. This emphasizes the necessity for laws to be transparent and understandable to ensure individuals governed by these laws can adhere to them, reflecting the concept of promulgation. Therefore, Fuller refers to promulgation as “the clear communication of laws to those they affect.”
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 2
Which of the following best describes the central issue in the Hart-Fuller debate?
Which of the following best describes the central issue in the Hart-Fuller debate?
Updated On: Sep 10, 2025
- The influence of morality on state
- Whether law and morality are inherently connected
- The role of judges in interpreting morality
- The influence of religious values on legal system
Hide Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is B
Solution and Explanation
The central issue in the Hart-Fuller debate revolves around whether law and morality are inherently connected. This debate critiques the nature of law and its relationship with morality. Lon Fuller contends that for a principle to be recognized as law, it must adhere to eight standards, which he terms the "internal morality of law." These standards demand that laws are generally applicable, clearly communicated, consistent, non-retroactive, and within the human capacity to follow, among others. These criteria emphasize the intrinsic link between legal rules and moral standards, proposing that law inherently includes moral dimensions to ensure justice and efficacy. Thus, the debate centers on the nexus between legal systems and moral principles, challenging the positivist view that separates law and morality into distinct spheres.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 3
What was Lon Fuller’s main criticism of Hart’s legal positivism?
What was Lon Fuller’s main criticism of Hart’s legal positivism?
Updated On: Sep 10, 2025
- It ignores moral obligations of a judge to make decisions on ethics
- It places too much emphasis on legal rules without considering their moral implication
- It ignores the role of international law in shaping domestic legal systems
- All of the above
Hide Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is B
Solution and Explanation
Lon Fuller’s primary critique of Hart’s legal positivism centers around the moral dimension of law. Hart's theory emphasizes the separation of law and morality, focusing strictly on what the law is rather than what it ought to be. Fuller's criticism is based on his belief that such an approach places too much emphasis on legal rules without considering their moral implications. He articulates that for a principle to be acceptable as a law, it must be evaluated against eight standards, ensuring the law is not only a system of rules but also contains "internal morality." This internal morality aligns with ensuring the laws are general, public, prospective, clear, consistent, possible to follow, relatively stable, and consistently applied, contrasting with Hart’s more rigid, rule-based approach. Fuller believes that ignoring these moral dimensions and the internal morality of law leads to a loss of the essence and purpose of legal systems.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 4
Why does Fuller argue that legal standards should be free from contradictions?
Why does Fuller argue that legal standards should be free from contradictions?
Updated On: Sep 10, 2025
- To allow for greater judicial discretion
- To ensure laws are adaptable to different situations
- To maintain respect for the law and ensure consistency
- To simplify legal education
Hide Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is C
Solution and Explanation
Lon Fuller argues that legal standards should be free from contradictions to maintain respect for the law and ensure consistency. This is part of his broader philosophy on the "internal morality of law," which includes eight key standards. Here is a detailed explanation of why consistency and freedom from contradictions are vital:
- Consistency Supports Respect for Law: Fuller asserts that legal systems are perceived as fair and just when they operate consistently without contradictions. If laws contradict each other, it leads to confusion, undermining public trust and respect.
- Predictability and Reliability: Individuals and entities rely on the predictability of legal systems to make informed decisions. Contradictory laws make it impossible to predict outcomes or rely on the law’s guidance, affecting planning and adherence to the law.
- Clarity of Standards: Fuller emphasizes that laws must clearly state standards of action and inaction. Contradictions obscure these standards, making it difficult for individuals to understand their legal obligations, thus violating the principle of clarity.
- Foundation of Consistency: Fuller argues a consistent body of law facilitates coherent interpretation and enforcement. It prevents arbitrary decisions by the judiciary, reinforcing the principle of a government of laws rather than of individuals.
In summary, for a legal system to function effectively and ethically according to Fuller’s standards, it must avoid contradictions to foster respect, ensure predictability, and maintain clarity and consistency. This supports the correct answer: To maintain respect for the law and ensure consistency.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 5
Which of the following best describes the concept of “internal morality” in law according to Lon Fuller?
Which of the following best describes the concept of “internal morality” in law according to Lon Fuller?
Updated On: Sep 10, 2025
- Law should be flexible and adaptive to individual circumstances
- Law should be explained with clarity and precision
- Law should prioritize economic efficiency
- Law should be created by popular vote
Hide Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is B
Solution and Explanation
Lon Fuller, a notable legal philosopher, articulates the concept of “internal morality” of law, which posits that laws must conform to certain procedural principles to have moral authority. According to Fuller, these are not just guidelines but essential standards without which law loses its legitimacy. Among these standards, the requirement for laws to be articulated clearly and precisely is paramount. This concept is aligned with Fuller’s assertion that the mandates of the law must be communicated effectively and that the laws should be free from contradictions to ensure fairness and consistency.
In the context of the given question, the correct option aligns with Fuller’s emphasis on clarity and consistency in legal formulations. Other options like flexibility and adaptability, prioritization of economic efficiency, and creation of laws by popular vote do not directly relate to Fuller’s notion of internal morality. He stresses that laws must be expressed with precision and be understandable to ensure they guide behavior appropriately, which is encapsulated in the correct answer: Law should be explained with clarity and precision.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Top Questions on Jurisprudence
- According to Henry Maine, “The movement of progressive societies has hitherto been a movement from ___________”.
- TS PGLCET - 2025
- Legal Studies
- Jurisprudence
- The solidary obligation imposes ___________ liability in law.
- TS PGLCET - 2025
- Legal Studies
- Jurisprudence
- Which prominent jurist has developed the Will Theory of Rights?
- TS PGLCET - 2025
- Legal Studies
- Jurisprudence
- As per the definition given by John Austin, ownership is a right unrestricted in point of ______.
- TS PGLCET - 2025
- Legal Studies
- Jurisprudence
- A precedent given per incuriam is _______________.
- TS PGLCET - 2025
- Legal Studies
- Jurisprudence
View More Questions
Questions Asked in CLAT PG exam
- The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ‘Nil Ratan Kundu and another v. Abhijit Kundu’ 2008(3) Apex Court Judgements 232 (SC), while granting the custody to the maternal grandparents observed: In our judgement, the law relating to custody of a child is fairly well settled and it is this. In deciding a difficult and complex question as to custody of minor, a Court of law should keep in mind relevant statutes and the rights flowing therefrom. But such cases cannot be decided solely by interpreting legal provisions. It is a humane problem in live in relationship and is required to be solved with human touch. A Court while dealing with custody cases, is neither bound by statutes nor by strict rules of evidence or procedure nor by precedents. In selecting proper guardian of a minor, the paramount consideration should be the welfare and well-being of the child. In selecting a guardian, the Court is exercising parens patriae jurisdiction and is expected, may bound, to give due weight to a child’s ordinary comfort, contentment, health, education, intellectual development and favorable surroundings. But over and above physical comforts, moral and ethical values cannot be ignored. They are equally, or we may say, even more important, essential and indispensable consideration. If the minor is old enough to form an intelligent preference or judgement, the Court must consider such preference as well, though the final decision should rest with the Court as to what is conducive to the welfare of the minor.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ‘Gaurav Nagpal v. Semedha Nagpal’-(2009)1 SCC 42, while giving paramount importance to the welfare of the child, which should include moral and ethical values, besides ethical well-being, observed as under:
When the court is confronted with conflicting demands made by the parents, each time it has to justify the demands. The Court has not only to look at the issue on legalistic basis, in such matters human angles are relevant for deciding those issues. The Court then does not give emphasis on what the parties say, it has to exercise a jurisdiction which is aimed at the welfare of the minor. As observed recently in Mausami Moitra Ganguli case, the Court has to give due weightage to the child’s ordinary contentment, health, education, intellectual development and favorable surroundings, but over and above physical comforts, the moral and ethical values have also to be noted. They are equal if not more important than the others.
(Extracts from Jaswinder Singh and Another vs Surjit Singh, AIR 2010 (NOC) 425 (P. & H.))- CLAT PG - 2025
- Family Laws
- The Companies Act, 2013 does not deal with insolvency and bankruptcy when the companies are unable to pay their debts or the aspects relating to the revival and rehabilitation of the companies and their winding up if revival and rehabilitation is not possible. In principle, it cannot be doubted that the cases of revival or winding up of the company on the ground of insolvency and inability to pay debts are different from cases where companies are wound up under Section 271 of the Companies Act, 2013. The two situations are not identical. Under Section 271 of the Companies Act, 2013, even a running and financially sound company can also be wound up for the reasons in clauses (a) to (e). The reasons and grounds for winding up under Section 271 of the Companies Act, 2013 are vastly different from the reasons and grounds for the revival and rehabilitation scheme as envisaged under the IBC. The two enactments deal with two distinct situations and in our opinion, they cannot be equated when we examine whether there is discrimination or violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. For the revival and rehabilitation of the companies, certain sacrifices are required from all quarters, including the workmen. In case of insolvent companies, for the sake of survival and regeneration, everyone, including the secured creditors and the Central and State Government, are required to make sacrifices. The workmen also have a stake and benefit from the revival of the company, and therefore unless it is found that the sacrifices envisaged for the workmen, which certainly form a separate class, are onerous and burdensome so as to be manifestly unjust and arbitrary, we will not set aside the legislation,solely on the ground that some or marginal sacrifice is to be made by the workers. We would also reject the argument that to find out whether there was a violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India or whether the right to life under Article 21 Constitution of India was infringed, we must word by word examine the waterfall mechanism envisaged under the Companies Act, 2013, where the company is wound up in terms of grounds (a) to (e) of Section 271 of the Companies Act, 2013; and the rights of the workmen when the insolvent company is sought to be revived, rehabilitated or wound up under the Code. The grounds and situations in the context of the objective and purpose of the two enactments are entirely different.
(Extracted, with edits and revision, from the judgement in Moser Baer Karamchari Union Thr. President Mahesh Chand Sharma v. Union of India and Ors, 2023 SCC Online SC 547)- CLAT PG - 2025
- Company Law
- Ahmadi, J. (as he then was) speaking for himself and Punchhi, J., endorsed the recommendations in the following words-The time is ripe for taking stock of the working of the various Tribunals set up in the country after the insertion of Articles 323-A and 323-B in the Constitution. After the incorporation of these two articles, Acts have been enacted where-under tribunals have been constituted for dispensation of justice. Sufficient time has passed, and experience gained in these last few years for taking stock of the situation with a view to finding out if they have served the purpose and objectives for which they were constituted. Complaints have been heard in regard to the functioning of other tribunals as well and it is time that a body like the Law Commission of India has a comprehensive look-in with a view to suggesting measures for their improved functioning. That body can also suggest changes in the different statutes and evolve a model on the basis whereof tribunals may be constituted or reconstituted with a view to ensuring greater independence. An intensive and extensive study needs to be undertaken by the Law Commission in regard to the Constitution of tribunals under various statutes with a view to ensuring their independence so that the public confidence in such tribunals may increase and the quality of their performance may improve.
Before parting with the case, it is necessary to express our anguish over the ineffectiveness of the alternative mechanism devised for judicial review. The judicial review and remedy are the fundamental rights of the citizens. The dispensation of justice by the tribunal is much to be desired.
(Extracted with Edits from R.K. Jain v. Union of India, 1993 (4) SCC 119)- CLAT PG - 2025
- Constitutional Laws
- The elements of tort of negligence consist in – (a) duty of care; (b) duty is owed to the plaintiff; (c) the duty has been carelessly breached. Negligence does not entail liability unless the exacts a duty in the given circumstances to observe care. Duty is an obligation recognised by law to avoid conduct fraught with unreasonable risk of damage to others. The question whether duty exists in a particular situation involves determination of law. Hence, three ingredients are necessary for the existence of a duty of care: (i) foreseeability of the damage, (ii) proximity of relationship between the parties; and (iii) whether it is “just, fair and reasonable” that the law should impose a duty of care. In Caparo Industries Plc. v. Dickman, 1990 2AC 605, the court held that breach of duty is concerned with the standard of care that ought to have been adopted in the circumstances and whether the defendant’s conduct fell below that standard i.e., whether he was careless.
The court while quoting Rajkot Municipal Corporation v. Manjulben Jayantilal Nakum, 1997 stated that as a tort, negligence consists of legal duty to take care and breach of that duty. Duty determines whether the type of loss suffered by the plaintiff in the particular way in which to occurred can ever be actionable. The division of negligence into duty, breach and consequent damage is convenient for the purpose of exposition but it can be confusing because the issues will often overlap. The process of determining a breach of duty involves three steps: First, it is necessary to ascertain the qualities of the reasonable person, given the qualities attributed to him, would have taken in the circumstances. The factors that are permissible to take into account in this regard are prescribed by law, but the amount of care that the reasonable person would have taken is a question of fact. Thirdly, it must be determined whether the defendant took less care than the reasonable person would have taken.
(Extracts from Managing Director, Kerala Tourism Development Corporation Limited v. Deepti Singh and Ors., 2019 SC)- CLAT PG - 2025
- Law of Torts
- Article 14 of the Constitution stipulates that the State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of laws within the territory of India. Article 15(1) states that the State should not discriminate against any citizen on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them. Article 15(4) stipulates that nothing in Article 15 shall prevent the State from making any special provision for the advancement of any socially and educationally backward classes of citizens or for the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes. Article 16 deals with equality of opportunity in matters of public employment. Clause (1) of Article 16 guarantees equality of opportunity for all citizens in matters relating to employment or appointment to any office under the State. Clause (2) stipulates that no citizen shall be discriminated in or be ineligible for any employment or office under the State on the grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, descent, place of birth, residence or any of them. Clause (4) of the provision states that nothing in Article 16 shall prevent the State from making any provision for the reservation of appointments or posts in favour of any backward class of citizens, which in the opinion of the State, is not adequately represented in the services under the State. The purpose of the equal opportunity principle in Article 16(1) and the reservation provision in Article 16(4) has emerged as a focal point of the jurisprudence on reservations in this Court. A discussion of the journey of the competing models of equality that the Court has espoused and their evolution over the course of the years is necessary to understand the constitutional vision on equality.
The impugned constitutional amendments by which Article 16 (4-A) and 16 (4-B) have been inserted, flow from Article 16 (4). They do not alter the structure of Article 16 (4). They retain the controlling factors or the compelling reasons which enables the State to provide for reservation keeping in mind the overall efficiency of the state administration under article 335. Sub-categorization within a class is a constitutional requirement to secure substantive equality in the event that there is a distinction between two sections of a class; Sub-classification must not lead to the exclusion of one of the categories in the class. A model that provides sufficient opportunities to all categories of the class must be adopted; and Sub-classification among a class must be on a reasonable basis.
Justice Bela Trivedi opined, in dissent, that presidential list of scheduled castes notified under Article 341 cannot be altered by the States. Any change to this list can only be made by a law enacted by Parliament. Sub-classification, according to her would amount to tampering with the Presidential List and undermine the object Article 341, which aims to eliminate political influence in the SC-ST List. Further, she emphasised the importance of adhering to the rule of plain and literal interpretation. She mentions that any preferential treatment for a sub-class within the presidential list would deprive other classes within the same category of their benefits. In the absence of executive or legislative power, state lack the competence to sub-classify castes and the benefit reserved for all SCs. Allowing states to do so would constitute a colourable exercise of power, which is impermissible under law. Justice Trivedi concluded by affirming that affirmative action by States must remain within constitutional boundaries and held that the law laid down in E.V. Chinnaiah case was correct and should be upheld.
(Extract from The State of Punjab & Ors. v. Davinder Singh & Ors. 2024 SC)- CLAT PG - 2025
- Constitutional Laws
View More Questions