Doctrine of intentionalism in the interpretation of laws

  • V. Yu. Seredyuk  Candidate of of Legal Sciences, Associate Professor, Head of the territorial service center № 8049 regional service center of the Main service center of the Ministry of Internal Affairs in Kyiv (branch of the Main service center of the Ministry of Internal Affairs)
Keywords: doctrine of intentionalism, legal technique, interpretation of legal norms, purposive approach, purpose of law adoption.


The purpose of the article is to highlight the question of the doctrine of intentionalism in the interpretation of law and in justifying its application.

The scientific novelty of the article lies in the characterization of the doctrine of intentionalism in the interpretation of the law, which is used by most countries of continental Europe in the process of interpreting their own legislation. It has been found that the prevailing view in English legal doctrine is that the processes of analyzing the text of a legislative act and the attempt to identify the legislative intention (intent) are interrelated, but preference is given to the text. Therefore, the role of the judge is to find the intention of the author of the rule of law, based on what is stated in the text of the law, and not on the basis of the subjective opinion of the author. It is shown that the doctrine of intentionalism, in particular the method of interpretation, based on the purpose of the law in addition to the European Union is also used in the practice of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine and the Supreme Court of the United States. The idea of clarifying the general purpose of the adopted law puts in the first place not the motivational component of the legislative process in the person of the author of the law and its intention, but the general local task for which parliamentarians pass the law. It has been found that this approach does not answer the question of how to resolve a dispute when the formulation of the common purpose of the law does not indicate direct ways to resolve complex situations and cases that arise in real life during the application of the rule of law.

Conclusions. From a methodological point of view, the rule of law as a criterion of justice is a fiction of legal thinking. In the process of its interpretation, it will be inevitable to produce the desired right of the law enforcer, which remains the only criterion of fairness, especially in case of coincidence with the desired right of a judge of a higher instance. The results of the interpretation should be reduced to revealing the will of the legislator, expressed in the verbal wording of the law or other normative legal act. Otherwise, it is possible to deviate from the true meaning of the rule of law for the reason that the true intentions (intentions) of its creator were different.


1. Касаткин С. Н. Анализ языка и объяснение правовых понятий: философско-лингвистическая методология Г. Харта. Современные подходы к пониманию права и их влияние на развитие отраслевой юридической науки, законодательства и правоприменительной практики: сб. науч. тр. / учреждение образования «Акад. М-ва внутр. дел Респ. Беларусь»; под общ. ред. В. И. Павлова, А.Л. Савенка. Минск : Академия МВД, 2017. С. 99–109.
2. The purposive approach. Corse «Judges and the law» / OpenLearn. URL: (Дата звернення: 15.10.2021).
3. Овчинников А. И., Овчинникова С. П. Современная теория толкования права: классический и неклассический подходы. Юристъ-Правоведъ. 2007. № 1(20). С. 102–110.
4. Cross R., Bell J., Engle G. Statutory interpretation. 3rd ed. Oxford : Oxford University Press, 2006. 211 p.
5. Elliott C., Quinn F. English legal system. Harlow : Pearson, 2014. 734 p.
6. Викторова Э. Ю. Толкование норм права в Англии и США : дисс. … д-ра юрид. наук : 12.00.01. Москва, 2019. 273 с.
7. Онищук І. І. Правовий моніторинг: проблеми методології, теорії та практики : монографія. Івано-Франківськ – Дрогобич : Коло, 2017. 512 с.
8. Новітнє вчення про тлумачення правових актів : навч. посіб. з курсу тлумачення прав. актів для суддів, що проходять підвищ. кваліфікації, і канд. на посади суддів, що проходять спеціальну підготовку / В. Г. Ротань, І. Л. Самсін, А. Г. Ярема та ін.; за ред.: В. Г. Ротань. Х. : Право, 2013. 752 с. URL: (Дата звернення: 15.10.2021).
9. Концепція вдосконалення судівництва для утвердження справедливого суду в Україні відповідно до європейських стандартів : схвалена Указом Президента України № 361/2006 від 10 травня 2006 року. URL: (Дата звернення: 15.10.2021).
10. Рішення Конституційного Суду України у справі за конституційним поданням 57 народних депутатів України щодо відповідності Конституції України (конституційності) Закону України «Про всеукраїнський референдум» № 4-р/2018 від 26 квітня 2018 року. URL: (Дата звернення: 15.10.2021).
11. Беляева О. М. Толкование норм права. Ученые записки Казанского государственного университета. Гуманитарные науки. 2007. Том 149, кн. 6. С. 39–47.
12. Васьковский Е. В. Цивилистическая методология. Учение о толковании и применении гражданских законов. М. : ЮрИнфоР, 2002. 507 c.
13. Hart, H. L. A. Theory and Definition in Jurisprudence. Aristotelian Society. Supp. Vol. XXIX, 1955. P. 213–264.

1. Kasatkin, S. N. (2017). Analysis of language and explanation of legal concepts: philosophical and linguistic methodology of G. Hart. In: Modern approaches to understanding law and their impact on the development of branch legal science, legislation and law enforcement practice: collection of articles. scientific. tr. / educational institution «Acad. M-va int. cases Resp. Belarus»; under total. ed. V. I. Pavlova, A. L. Savenka. Minsk : Academy of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, 99–109 [in Russian].
2. The purposive approach. Corse «Judges and the law» / OpenLearn. URL: (Last accessed: 15.10.2021).
3. Ovchinnikov, A. I. & Ovchinnikova, S. P. (2007). Modern theory of interpretation of law: classical and non-classical approaches. Lawyer-Lawyer, 1 (20), 102–110 [in Russian].
4. Cross, R., Bell, J. & Engle, G. (2006). Statutory interpretation. 3-rd ed. Oxford : Oxford University Press.
5. Elliott, C., Quinn F. (2014). English legal system. Harlow : Pearson.
6. Viktorova, E. Yu. (2019). Interpretation of the rule of law in England and the United States: diss. … d-ra jurid. sciences : 12.00.01. Moscow [in Russian].
7. Onyshchuk, I. I. (2017). Legal monitoring: problems of methodology, theory and practice. Ivano-Frankivsk-Drohobych: Kolo [in Ukrainian].
8. Rotan, V. G. (Еd.), Samsin, I. L. & Yarema, A. G. (2013). The latest doctrine of the interpretation of legal acts. Kharkiv : Pravo. URL: (Last accessed: 15.10.2021) [in Ukrainian].
9. President of Ukraine. (2006). The concept of improving the judiciary to establish a fair court in Ukraine in accordance with European standards: approved by Decree № 361/2006. URL: (Last accessed: 15.10.2021) [in Ukrainian].
10. Constitutional Court of Ukraine. (2018). Decision in the case on the constitutional petition of 57 people’s deputies of Ukraine on the compliance of the Constitution of Ukraine (constitutionality) of the Law of Ukraine «On All-Ukrainian Referendum» № 4-r/2018. URL: (Last accessed: 15.10.2021) [in Ukrainian].
11. Belyaeva, O. M. (2007). Interpretation of the rule of law. Scientific notes of Kazan State University. Humanities, 149 (6), 39–47 [in Russian].
12. Vaskovsky, Ye. V. (2002). Civilistic methodology. Teaching about the interpretation and application of civil laws. Moscow : YurInfoR [in Russian].
13. Hart, H. L. A. (1955). Theory and Definition in Jurisprudence. Aristotelian Society, Supp. Vol. XXIX, 213–264.

Abstract views: 17
PDF Downloads: 9
How to Cite
Seredyuk , V. (2021). Doctrine of intentionalism in the interpretation of laws . Scientific Papers of the Legislation Institute of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, (6), 81-88.