Interpretation and adjudication are core functions of the judicial branch in any legal system. When courts interpret laws, they explain and clarify the meaning of constitutions, statutes, and regulations, ensuring that legal provisions are applied consistently and appropriately to the facts of each case. This process of judicial interpretation can involve examining the intent of lawmakers, the precise wording of legal texts, and the broader principles underlying the law.
Adjudication is the process by which judges resolve disputes and make binding decisions in individual cases brought before them. Through adjudication, courts settle disagreements between parties, determine rights and responsibilities, and issue rulings that can create legal precedents for future cases. Together, interpretation and adjudication enable the judiciary to maintain the rule of law, adapt legal norms to changing circumstances, and provide justice within society.
Interpretation and adjudication are the two main functions of the judicial branch.
Judicial interpretation involves clarifying the meaning of legal texts and ensuring their consistent application.
Adjudication is the process by which judges resolve disputes and issue rulings.
Adjudication and interpretation help maintain order, adapt the law, and provide justice.
The judiciary is responsible for adjudication and interpretation.
Courts consider intent, text, and principles—not public opinion or media.
Judicial rulings can establish legal precedents for future cases.
Adjudication results in dispute resolution and defining rights—though it does not draft laws.
Judges engage in constitutional interpretation when explaining constitutional provisions.
Judicial review involves courts assessing whether laws align with the constitution.