The relationship between judicial interpretation and the specification of legal norms: Theoretical approachesn

Abstract

This article examines the theoretical and practical relationship between judicial interpretation and the specification of legal norms as interrelated yet distinct instruments of law enforcement. On the basis of a systematic analysis of doctrinal approaches and contemporary judicial practice, the study identifies their functional purposes, common features, and criteria for differentiation. It is argued that judicial interpretation is primarily aimed at clarifying the meaning, scope, and limits of legal norms in order to ensure the unity of legal understanding and consistency of judicial practice, whereas specification serves to detail and adapt abstract normative provisions to the circumstances of particular legal relations. Special attention is paid to the principle of legal certainty and to the risks associated with excessive specification, which may result in the de facto transformation of judicial interpretation into judicial law-making. Drawing on recent decisions of the Supreme Court of Ukraine, the article demonstrates a shift from formalistic adjudication toward a reflexive and analytical model of justice, in which courts develop practical criteria for the application of evaluative concepts and for addressing legislative gaps. The study concludes that the development of unified methodological approaches and standards for judicial interpretation and specification is essential for improving the quality of law enforcement, safeguarding legal certainty, and maintaining a balance between regulatory flexibility and the limits of judicial discretion.