Laws are usually written in a general way, so that they can be applied to a wide range of cases, which often gives rise to different interpretations of the law, which in some cases causes some conflicts and that not everyone interprets the same text in the same way.
The literal meaning of the words, the historical contexts in which the law was written, the interpretation in comparison with analogous or similar laws or the interpretation of the intention sought with said norm, can be ways of analyzing or interpreting a law, forms or manners, all of which are subjective, as they are subject to the interpretation, method or analysis of the court and corresponding lawyers in each case, although with them equity and justice are sought.
In Spain, the Civil Code regulates the way in which laws must be interpreted, prevailing the use of literal interpretation of the written text, however, in a language as rich as ours, even taking into account to the literality of a text, it can be subjectively interpreted, except that it has been written in such a way that it leaves no room for doubt, through strong and reliable grammatical sentences, such as “theft is a crime.” (the example is too simple, I know).
The Civil Code in Spain also allows interpretation taking into account the historical context, the purpose and even through comparison or analysis with analogous, similar or complementary laws or regulations, which opens the wide range to multiple interpretations of texts that are not conclusive or not sufficiently explicit as the one set out in the previous text.
If we take as a starting point to interpret a Law its historical context, placing it as a result of the moment and the circumstances of the time in which it was drafted, it could be assumed that there may be a significant number of norms that will currently be out of date in time, with respect to the social, political or economic customs and habits of today’s society.
In turn, by analyzing analogous laws, lawyers and courts can, using superior national laws and even international laws (European Regulations), manage to interpret a not very clear norm in an effective way, for example, by comparing a Community norm with a norm analogous or similar national, or with European regulations.
This way of analyzing and interpreting a standard may be appropriate when the standard regulates international procedures, for example those related to trade, or consumer rights, taking into account the opinions contained in higher European standards, for example.
Now, if we start from the premise that laws are made for a purpose, it is possible to interpret a norm based on the analysis of the purpose that was intended to be achieved when drafting it, by understanding laws as instruments developed in order to achieve an objective. To do this, it is often necessary to analyze the legislative background of said law, including the problems that the law intended to address and even the interpretation that has already been made of it in past situations, similar to the one under study.
This way of analyzing the law to achieve a fair and fair interpretation is regularly applied in conflicts arising from the interpretation of contracts and similar legal documents.
However, despite all of the above, it is notable the differences that can be found in everyday life situations, in which a court issues a sentence that is subsequently reinterpreted by another higher court, which reaches a different verdict.
If we assume that in the end, the members of the courts, judges and lawyers are people, and that they are subject to variations in terms of experiences and knowledge, it is possible to think that their assessment and interpretation from a norm, will have different conclusions, both the further away they are in their ways of thinking, due to the evolution of their lives.
In Spain, the Supreme Court is the highest legislative body, and therefore, it is the final body to which a sentence or legislative conclusion can be appealed, with this having the last valid expression on it, with no room for any other, once its voice has been heard. been expressed.
Now, taking into account the above, and recognizing the mass of laws and norms evolved and complementary to previous norms, it can be considered quite common that from the analysis of a norm that in turn corrects another previous one, on which it is based, that It is also a correction of a previous one, which is a readjustment to society carried out why a judicial process can last forever in administrations and different judicial entities.
Even looking for sentences already made, it may be the case that the sentence analogous to the interpretation that a court considers correct and fair, is out of time for our time, that is, that society has changed so much that this jurisprudence is not really applicable to support the conclusion expressed at this time by said court.
With all this, we can therefore consider that the current judicial and legislative world, by not having really clear and interpretable laws, may be subject in some cases to many subjective or difficult interpretations to understand and even to carry out.
However, how can we legislate in such a clear and concise manner that it is practically impossible to interpret what has been expressed? How can we contemplate in a rule all the supposed actions, or facts that could occur at a given time, and that would imply in some way a variation in itself, its severity, motivation or consequences?
Of course, we must understand that in many cases, when a procedure for drafting, updating or renewing a standard is initiated, a reason or purpose is sought, which perhaps when the standard is already finalized or the process of debate and study of the text is already drafted and pending approval, it is necessary to consider new scenarios or characteristics, since it must, for example, cover a purpose greater than that initially proposed, due to the advances and evolutions produced during this time in the property society. This usually occurs when drafting regulations related, for example, to the use of technologies, where the speed of their current developments and implementations is impossible for legislative bodies to follow.
In the same way, sometimes, when reading a rule, it gets twisted or entangled in others that in some way also affect it, for example, in a rule that regulates the economic activities to be carried out in a premises, located in a certain place. , it is necessary to assess what is dictated by the rules that regulate the activities of the land in the area in which the building in which said activity is to be established is located, or consider a sanitary rule that affects health, or a rule related to the noise, or the traffic, or….
In any case, we should consider some perhaps simpler or simpler ways to update the legal regulations that regulate us, especially those that may affect users and companies on a daily basis, seeking a debureaucratization of today’s society, of administrative systems supported by legal and procedural regulations based on legislative norms updated from other legislative norms, which have already been updated several times since their initial drafting, above all, seeking to facilitate the understanding and consultation of These are for the plain and simple population, who normally do not have, nor should they have, exhaustive knowledge of the legal and regulatory environment included in the laws, which are often written using a tortuous and complicated language, called “legal “, which requires repeated and calm reading to achieve understanding.
Perhaps thus, many queries, claims or conflicts that currently reach law firms, courts and administrative bodies, in the form of complaints or claims, would not take place, or would be easily resolved, either between the participants or litigants themselves, or by the own labor or administrative staff or by the lawyers themselves, as there are explicit, clear and concise rules that regulate these procedures, without the need to carry out legal diving, among an infinite number of intertwined or complementary regulations and updated updates of laws written long ago, of which Initial essences survive only its most general articles.
