Abstract

The jurisprudence position difference in common law systems and the written law among the sources of law requires the study of the jurisprudence role in the interpretation of the law, and its adaptation to the realities of society. In Iranian law, jurisprudence means identical judgments of prosecutors from additional resources and commentary, and accepting the fact that, it could create a legal rule seems unlikely. In France, with the approval of the separation of powers and criticizing the classical doctrine, it seemed unlikely, the jurisprudence has a legislative role, however, such an idea has been expanded with all law branches and it seems to be a balance between resources related to legislate on the one hand and jurisprudence, on the other hand. Since, the rules express the general rules and it is impossible to predict the detail in the legislative practically, it is jurisprudence that could provide interpretations consistent with realities and social requirements of the law, in a complementary and commentary role. In this paper, the relationship between jurisprudence and interpretation of the law, especially in cases where we face with the need to interpret the law and the effectiveness of position on the interpretation of the law and its adaptation with the realities of society by jurisprudence will be discussed. These matters are examined with the descriptive analysis method that shows the importance of them in highlighting the role of jurisprudence in the legal system.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.