Rechtsvinding

Rechtsvinding is the process by which a court determines the applicable legal norms for a particular dispute and decides how those norms should be interpreted and applied to the concrete facts. It is the interpretive and justificatory activity that translates abstract rules into a binding ruling, and it goes beyond merely reading the text of laws. Beweis- and fact-finding are separate phases of adjudication; Rechtsvinding concerns what the law requires.

In performing Rechtsvinding a judge relies on a range of legal sources and methods. Core sources include constitutional provisions, statutory texts, and administrative regulations, supplemented by international law, customary law, and persuasive doctrine or precedent. Interpretive methods commonly used are literal (textual) interpretation, teleological (purposive) interpretation, and systematic interpretation that seeks coherence within the legal system. When gaps or ambiguities exist, judges may apply analogies within the framework of the legal order, while remaining mindful of the hierarchy of norms and fundamental rights.

The concept underscores the idea that law is applied, not merely read. It interacts with the evolution of law through case law and doctrine, and it is shaped by constitutional principles and social aims. Debates around Rechtsvinding often address the balance between judicial discretion and adherence to the legislature’s intent, the risk of judicial activism, and the need for predictability and equal treatment under the law.

Overall, Rechtsvinding is a central element of legal reasoning in civil, administrative, and constitutional contexts, enabling courts to adapt legal norms to concrete situations while maintaining a coherent and principled legal order.