POUND’S CRITICS OF MECHANICAL JURISPRUDENCE

Abstract

In this article author analise critics of mechanical jurisprudence of american legal sociologist Roscoe Pound. This critics attacks legal doctrine which was actual in 19th century, according to which legal decision is product of process of formal logics based on legal formalised premises. Mechanical jurisprudence missed the aim of law because it wasn’t taking into consideration non legal elements which are often crucial for bringing legal decision. This jural doctrine was longing for mechanical outcome certainty, what is dogmaticly and sociologicly unreal. Mechanical jurisprudence was bringing down the role of judge on the logical automat which is able only to use logical instruments, not to taking into consideration sociological side of legal case. Mechanical form of law application expressly baned judges to apply discretional element in adjuducation, affraiding of it’s manipulating and transformation into arbitrary reasoning which isn’t easily predictable.