Special Events
The status of the human embryo in UK law and public policy: Gradualist language but instrumental use
Thurs 20 October 2011
Senior Common Room, Law Faculty St.Cross Building
4.45 -7.00 pm
JDG Special Panel
David Jones
Director, The Anscombe Bioethics Centre, Oxford
With respondents:
Robert P. George
McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence and Director of the James Madison Program in American Ideal and Institutions, Princeton University
Imogen Goold
Lecturer, Faculty of law, University of Oxford
___________________________________________
Tue, 14 June 2011
4pm-6pm (followed by wine and nibbles)
Lecture Theatre II, Law Faculty, St Cross Building
A Special Panel on John Finnis' philosophy of law
on the occasion of the publication of the second edition of Natural Law and Natural Rights
Speakers: Matthew Kramer (Cambridge), Hillel Steiner (Manchester), and John Finnis (Oxford)
Chair: Cecile Fabre (Oxford)
Matthew Kramer will present a paper entitled “Positivism and the Separability of Law and Morality”.
Hillel Steiner will present a paper entitled “Value Pluralism and the Nature of Rights”.
The two presentations will be followed by a response from John Finnis, and by general discussion.
Hillel Steiner will present a paper entitled “Value Pluralism and the Nature of Rights”.
The two presentations will be followed by a response from John Finnis, and by general discussion.
After the talks wine and nibbles will be provided. All welcome!
___________________________________________
___________________________________________
Wed, 9 Feb 2011
5.30pm (preceded by drinks at 5pm)
Lecture Theatre II, Law Faculty, St Cross Building
Special Panel:
Resituating Fuller
Speaker: Kristen Rundle (LSE)
Respondents: Nicola Lacey (Oxford
Respondents: Nicola Lacey (
Lecture Theatre II, Law Faculty, St Cross Building
Lon L. Fuller’s account of legality is widely accepted as the classic twentieth century statement of the principles of the rule of law. Yet his own argument that a necessary connection between law and morality manifests in the form of law is not generally accepted, and his legal theory continues to occupy a marginal place in the field of legal philosophy.
In her forthcoming book, Forms Liberate: Reclaiming the jurisprudence of Lon L. Fuller, Kristen Rundle makes a case for the inner coherence of Fuller’s jurisprudence by illuminating how his insistence on the connection between law and morality finds its foundation in the claim that the form of law, in its connection to the agency of the legal subject, introduces meaningful limits to lawgiving power. Having reclaimed this reading of Fuller from his published writings as well as from archival material, the book's final chapter (the paper under discussion) turns to ask how that reading might be situated within the landscape of contemporary legal philosophy, referring primarily to the jurisprudence of Joseph Raz and Ronald Dworkin.
Two draft Chapters of Forms Liberate are available for download: Chapter 6, on which this special panel will focus, and (for the purpose of outlining the project) the introductory Chapter 1.
___________________________________________
Thu, 27 Jan 2011
2.15pm-4.15pm
Lecture Room, Faculty of Philosophy, 10 Merton Street
The Torture Debate:
Does morality, and should the law, ever permit torture?
A discussion panel with Uwe Steinhoff (Hong Kong), David Rodin (Oxford ) and Jeremy Waldron (Oxford
Torture has been the subject of intense debate in recent years in political, legal and philosophical circles around the world. In this discussion panel, three leading philosophers discuss some of the questions which feature in, and lie behind, these debates. Is torture, as Jeremy Waldron recently claimed in Torture, Terror, and Trade-Offs, a moral abomination: something which is, morally speaking, out of the question in all circumstances? Should torture become, or remain, a legal abomination: something which is, as Waldron puts it, utterly forbidden by law? Should torturers always face legal sanctions for violating the prohibition on torture (assuming there is such a prohibition to violate), or can the circumstances sometimes be such that a torturer ought to be excused? Though some have claimed that even discussing such questions is a danger to be avoided, we warmly invite you to join our panellists’ exploration of this terrain.
___________________________________________
Thu, 25 Nov 2010
7pm (preceded by drinks at 6.30pm)
Lecture Theatre II, Law Faculty, St Cross Building
Special Panel
The Wrong, the Bad, and the Wayward: Liberalism's Mala in Se
Click here to download Alan Brudner's paper.
___________________________________________
2009/10
Mon, 24 May 2010
Gulbenkian Lecture Theatre, Law Faculty, St Cross Building
Discussion Panel
To whom Is Criminal Responsibility Owed and Why?
In 'Answering for Crime' (Hart Publishing, 2009) Prof Antony Duff argues that theorists of criminal law should take more seriously the relational dimensions of responsibility. We must ask not just what people are responsible for, but to whom they are responsible; in the context of criminal law, we must ask 'Who is [or should be] criminally responsible for what, to whom?' To be responsible is to be answerable, but to be answerable requires the existence of a party with standing to demand an answer. Thus, it seems, criminal theorists must concern themselves with the question: who has that standing with respect to criminal responsibility and on what terms, or subject to what conditions or limitations, do they have it?
___________________________________________
Fri, 5 March 2010
Gulbenkian Lecture Theatre, Law Faculty, St Cross Building
Discussion Panel
Legal Indeterminacy and the Nature of Adjudication
Fred Schauer, Stephen Guest, and Timothy Endicott
It is often said that judges have a duty to do justice according to law. This view is supported by various accounts of the legal reasoning which judges employ. Many argue, however, that legal indeterminacy is an unavoidable and significant source of judicial discretion. Yet, if the law significantly underdetermines the outcome of judicial decisions, the idea of a general duty to do justice according to law becomes problematic. This special panel considers whether it is possible to simultaneously recognise the judicial duty to do justice according to law and the phenomenon of legal indeterminacy, or must one of these ideas be jettisoned?
___________________________________________
Thu, 3 December 2009
Gulbenkian Lecture Theatre, Law Faculty, St Cross Building
Discussion Panel on N.E. Simmond’s 2007 book Law as a Moral Idea (OUP 2007)
Timothy Endicott, John Finnis, John Gardner, and Nigel Simmonds (Chair: John Tasioulas)
Timothy Endicott, John Finnis, John Gardner, and Nigel Simmonds (Chair: John Tasioulas)
In his book Simmonds pursued a novel and powerful argument about the value of law and the nature of legal theory. This panel discussion brings together the author with three leading legal and political philosophers, who will present and engage critically with the book's main arguments.
Organized by the Law Faculty.
___________________________________________
Wed, 24 June 2009
Lecture Theatre II, Law Faculty, St Cross Building
Discussion Panel
Interpretation: Pluralism and Innovation
A panel with Joseph Raz, Timothy Edincott, Roger Scruton and Nicos Stavropoulos, focusing on Joseph Raz's recent book (OUP 2009)
This event was co-sponsored by Oxford University Press.
___________________________________________
Thu, 21 May 2009
Thu, 21 May 2009
Lecture Theatre II, Law Faculty, St Cross Building
Discussion Panel
Causation and Responsibility
A discussion panel with Michael Moore, John Gardner, Jonathan Schaffer, and Jane Stapleton, based on Michael Moore's recent book (OUP 2009)
This event was co-sponsored by Oxford University Press.
___________________________________________
Mon, 2 March 2009
Lecture Theatre II, Law Faculty, St Cross Building
Discussion Panel
The Hart-Fuller Debate: 50 Years On
Leslie Green, Nicola Lacey, Ruti Teitel
The debate was based on the speakers' contributions to the then forthcoming volume The Hart-Fuller Debate in the Twenty-First Century, edited by Peter Cane (Hart Publishing, 2010).
Drafts of the speakers' contributions (not for quotation) can be found here (L Green), here (N Lacey) and here (R Teitel).
This event was kindly sponsored by Hart Publishing. It was also part of a project on "Civil Society and the Rule of Law" supported by the Mellon Foundation.
Drafts of the speakers' contributions (not for quotation) can be found here (L Green), here (N Lacey) and here (R Teitel).
This event was kindly sponsored by Hart Publishing. It was also part of a project on "Civil Society and the Rule of Law" supported by the Mellon Foundation.
___________________________________________
Wed, 25 February 2009
Lecture Theatre II, Law Faculty, St Cross Building
Discussion Panel
The Morality of War (vs?) The Laws of War
Allen Buchanan, Jeff McMahan, and Jeremy Waldron
This event was part of a project on "Civil Society and the Rule of Law" supported by the Mellon Foundation.
___________________________________________
Tue, 2 December 2008
Lecture Theatre II, Law Faculty, St Cross Building
Discussion panel
Positive Law and Moral Autonomy:
Themes from MacCormick's 'Institutions of Law'
John Finnis, John Gardner, Nicos Stavropoulos, and Jeremy Waldron on Neil MacCormick's Institutions of Law (OUP 2007).
The book Institutions of Law is the third book in the quartet 'Law, State, and Practical Reason'. The other books are Questioning Sovereignty (OUP 1999), Rhetoric and the Rule of Law (OUP 2005) and Practical Reason in Law and Morality (OUP 2009).
Discussion materials for download:
Chapter 14 of Institutions of Law (thanks to OUP)
Short synopsis of the book, by Neil MacCormick
Photos: click here to open a slideshow.
This event was kindly co-sponsored by Oxford University Press. It was also part of a project on "Civil Society and the Rule of Law" supported by the Mellon Foundation.
___________________________________________
2007/8 (10th Anniversary Special Events)
Wed, 4 June 2008
Lecture Theatre II, Law Faculty, St Cross Building
Discussion Panel
Punishing for Bad Luck: Should the Consequences of a Crime Affect the Punishment?
Andrew Ashworth, John Gardner, Jeremy Horder
Photos: click here to open a slideshow
Video: click here to watch videos of the session
This event was kindly co-sponsored by Oxford University Press.
___________________________________________
Wed, 5 March 2008
Gulbenkian Lecture Theatre, Law Faculty, St Cross Building
Discussion Panel
The Rule of Law
Joseph Raz, Leslie Green, and Nigel Simmonds
This session was part of a project on “Civil Society and the Rule of Law”, supported by the Mellon Foundation.
Pictures available here [taken by Maris Köpcke Tinturé, Raquel van der Wijk, Veronica Rodriguez-Blanco, Paddy Law and Senwung Luk (thank you all!)].
___________________________________________
Wed, 28 November 2007
90HS Lecture Room, University College
Discussion panel
Is there a positivist theory of law?
John Finnis, John Gardner, and Matthew Kramer
Thu, 11 October 2007
Allington Room, University College
Special opening session
Timothy Endicott, John Gardner, and Tony Honoré