Dr.

SHAKUNTALA MISRA NATIONAL REHABILITATION UNIVERSITY

Lucknow

Faculty of Law

SYNOPSIS FOR RESEARCH PROJECT ON

Primary and Secondary Rule of H.L.A. Hart

For

COURSE ON JURISPRUDENCE

CLASS: B.Com., LL.B (Hons.) 3rd Semester

Submitted by

ABHUDAY

B.comLLB\2016-2017\24

Academic Session: 2017-18

Under the Supervision of

Mr. Shail Shakya

Asst. Prof. in Law
Faculty of Law
Dr. Shakuntala Misra National Rehabilitation University
 RESEARCH PROPOSAL

a) Title of the Project:

The tittle of my project is Primary and Secondary Rule of HLA Hart.

b) Proposed Hypothesis:

To find out the path in which primary and secondary rule of hart defers in many
ways.Understanding the concept of primary and secondary sources.

c) Research Problem:

I have faced many problem to competing my project like as to collecting

different authors books.

d.) Research Methodology:

The research methodology of this research topic is Doctrinal.

e.) Research Questions:

1. Describe the rule of hart?

2. What do you mean by primary and secondary rules?

 LITERATURE REVIEW

Professor Harts positivism explains the existence of law with reference to the rule of recognition
binding force of which depends upon its acceptance. The validity of law is to be tested on the
basis of rule of recognition which is similar to Austins conception of sovereign. Hart, however,
insists that the rule of recognition is not an extra-jural hypothesis like Keelsons basic
Grundnorm. According to him, rule of recognition is the sole rule in a legal system whose
binding force depends upon its acceptance.

Prof. Hart approaches his concept of law in this way. According to him where there is law there
human conduct is made in some sense non-optional or obligation. Thus the idea of obligation is
at the core of a rule he commences I address book by criticizing Austins view of law as a
command. The idea of command explain a coercive order addressed to another in special
circumstance but not why a statute applies generally and also to its framers. There are other
varieties of laws, notably powers.
 INTRODUCTION

Hart has analyzed the relation between law, coercion, and morality, and has also attempted to
clarify the question of whether all laws may be properly conceptualized as coercive orders or as
moral commands. Hart says that there is no rationally necessary correlation between law and
coercion or between law and morality. According to him, classifying all laws as coercive orders
or as moral commands is oversimplifying the relation between law, coercion, and morality.

Hart describes primary rules of obligation as rules that impose duties or obligations on
individuals, such as the rules of the criminal law or the law of tort. They are binding because of
practices of acceptance which people are required to do or to abstain from certain actions. On the
other hand, secondary rules are those which confer power, public or private, such as the law that
facilitate the making of contracts, wills, trusts, marriages, etc. or which lay down rules governing
the composition of powers of courts, legislatures and other officials bodies.
 DRAFT TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Introduction
2. Internal aspects of harts law
3. Harts concept of law
4. There are various forms and variation of the concept of justice
5. Harts analysis the concept of justice
6. conclusion
 EXPLANATION TO TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Introduction :-

Hart has analyzed the relation between law, coercion, and morality, and has also attempted to
clarify the question of whether all laws may be properly conceptualized as coercive orders or as
moral commands. Hart says that there is no rationally necessary correlation between law and
coercion or between law and morality. According to him, classifying all laws as coercive orders
or as moral commands is oversimplifying the relation between law, coercion, and morality.

2. Internal aspects of harts law:-

According to Hart, normativity hinges on human attitudes to human action. Harts view is that
law depends not only on the external social pressures which are brought to bear on human
beings, but also on the inner point of view that such beings take towards rules conceived as
imposing obligations. In pre-legal societies, it is obligatory for its members not only to obey
those rules but also consciously to view them as common standards of behavior, violation of
which are to be criticized. Such criticisms being considered as legitimate both by the offender
and other members. In other words, in societies with only primary rules, an internal point of view
on the part of its members is necessary for the preservation of the group harmony, cohesion and
solidarity. Whereas, in societies with the both the rules (legal systems), however, it is not
necessary for the members to possess an internal point of view; it is enough if the officials of the
legal system have this view. Nonetheless, it is desirable that citizens, in such a society, also
experience it.

3. Harts concept of law :-

According to hart law is best understood as the union of primary rules. Primary rules are the
obligation where secondary rules are depends upon the primary rules , which allow the creation
and alteration of primary rules.

Primary rules are imposes duties concerns actions, invokes physical movements or changes.
Primary rules inefficient the maintain a primary rules inefficient because of absences of
authorize orbiters of disperse.

secondary rule confirms power and they providing for operations which lead not merely to
physical movement or changes but to the creation or variation of duties or obligation. Secondary
rules providing power to changes or amendment of the primary rules.
.4. There are various forms and variation of the concept of justice :-
Utilitarianisn is a form where punishment is forward-looking; Retributive administers
proportionate response to crime proven by lawful evidence, so that punishment is justly imposed
and considered as morally-correct and fully deserved; The law of retaliation is a military theory
of retributive justice which states that reciprocity should be equal to the wrong suffered -- "life
for life, wound for wound, stripe for stripe"; Distributive justice is directed at the appropriate
allocation of things - wealth, power, reward, respect - between different people, i.e. equal
distribution among the equals; Corrective justice seeks to reinstate equality when this is
disturbed. Some philosophers, such as the classical Greeks, conceive of justice as a virtuea
property of people, and only derivatively of their actions and the institutions they create. Others
accentuate actions or institutions, and only derivatively the people who bring them about. The
source of justice has diversely been attributed to harmony, divine command, natural law, or
human creation.

5. Harts analysis the concept of justice:-

Harts use of distinction between criteria and definitions to analyze justice has all general
problems of this distinction. Especially, most of the moral significance of justice is left out of the
definition and placed in the criteria. With no specification of the criteria of relevance, the
concept of justice is morally neutral. The concept of justice is a formal and not a substantive one.
Such a concept has the good quality of accounting for, or at least being compatible with various
normative outlooks. It is also subject to a corresponding defect of offering little guidance for
evaluating laws.
PROPOSED CONCLUSION OF RESEARCH

The distinction between primary rules of conduct and other, secondary rules is a crucial member
of the legal theorists toolbox. My own experience has been that a used this distinction to
understand legal problems and arguments, but that it rarely plays a direct role in my own work. .
Primary and secondary rules are everywhere and you need to understand that the differenced
them but you necessarily need to use the distinction when you constrict normative legal
argument.
 INDEX OF REFERENCES/ BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Dr. N. V. Parnjape, jurisprudence and legal theory (7th edition 2016) pg.37
2. V. D. Mahajans, , jurisprudence and legal theory (5th edition 2017) pg.458