Horban M. Judicial law concretization: general theoretical aspect.

The work defines main signs of law concretization, on which basis one forms the definition of its meaning as a juridical significant activity of a competent subject, aimed at reflecting accuracy and completeness of content of principles of law and legal norms, achievement of their maximal legal definition in order to create necessary preconditions for realization of legal prescriptions, where they are objectified. Judicial activity is being distinguished in wide and narrow meanings, its nature is being revealed, definition of notions is formed. The classification of judicial law concretization is carried out on the key criteria. In accordance with the types of the judicial activity law enforcement, law interpreting and law making forms of judicial law concretization are separated. Juridical nature of law enforcement, law interpretive and law making concretization is being revealed, definition of the corresponding notions are being formed. At the same time judicial law making concretization is the activity of the superior jurisdiction courts or the specially empowered judicial authority, aimed at reflection of the accuracy, fullness and maximal legal certainty of the legal prescriptions, being objectified in the judicial acts. Among them – absence of the legal regulation for such an activity, namely, defined procedure (rules) for execution of the judicial law concretization; absence of the defined legal character of the norms, concretized by the court in the process of its activity; absence of the delimitation between the law enforcement, law interpreting and law making concretization, defining of the peculiarities, specifics of each type. Three consequential stages for execution of the judicial law concretization are also outlined in the current work, ways of its execution on each of stages are offered, the latter are reflected in the methodologic recommendations concerning execution of the judicial law concretization in Ukraine.7452