2017-03-10 13:50

了解程度,现行的教育制度到男孩是槽定型,小流氓或不感兴趣的学习。这意味着需要有实质性的法律权利给孩子,以确保他们在课堂上平等对待,而不是作为第二类公民。因此,我们必须明白,仅仅是法律权利和固有的(也称为实质性的)权利之间有区别。Hohfeld一直是最重要的法学思想家讨论权利的不同类型之间的差异。Hohfeld对权利的分析主要是从分析的角度来看;Hohfeld的工作的主要目的是阐明的权利是什么。权利Hohfeld的分析分成四个不同的类别中;请求权;特权;权力和豁免权。这些权利已被组合成一个网格的权利[ 5 ],使人们了解的性质和内容的权利,个人有不同程度。正是这种清晰和精确的方法,使得Hohfeld的分析在法律领域的基本权利的解释。这一探索将争辩说,这种权利的阐述是必不可少的法理学和理解权利的性质。英国法下Hohfeld的分析清楚地表达有不同程度的权利包含在人权法案1998和不与议会主权的冲突。正如Helen Fenwick讨论.


To understand the extent that the current education system is disadvantaging boys is trough stereotyping as young hooligans or uninterested in learning. This means there needs to be substantive legal rights that are afforded to children in order to ensure that they are treated equally in the classroom and not as second class citizens. Therefore one must understand there is a difference between a mere legal right and an inherent (also known as substantive) right. Hohfeld has been the most significant jurisprudential thinker to discuss the difference between the varying types of rights. The focus of Hohfeld’s analysis of rights is from an analytical perspective; the main aim of Hohfeld’s work was to clarify exactly what rights are. Hohfeld’s analysis of rights is split into four different categories which are; claim-right; privilege; power and immunity. These rights have been put together into a grid of entitlements.which enables one to understand the nature and content of rights; which the individual has in varying degrees. It is this clear and precise method that makes Hohfeld’s analysis fundamental to rights interpretation within legal arenas. This exploration is going to argue that this exposition of rights is essential to jurisprudence and understanding the nature of rights. Under English law Hohfeld’s analysis clearly expresses how varying degrees of rights are contained under the Human Rights Act 1998 and do not conflict with parliamentary sovereignty. As Helen Fenwick discusses: