English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

The proposition that every lawyer and judge engages in legal reasoning from time to time seems uncontroversial enough; surely some of them do it often. It is therefore rather surprising that no one has yet satisfactorily explicated the nature of this process. The attractiveness of many received conceptions of the process has diminished considerably as a modicum of careful analysis has finally been brought to bear on the problem in the last ten years. However, no unified theory has emerged to replace the older views, and it appears that legal philosophers are far from agreed on the general form such a theory might take.

Legal Reasoning: In Search of an Adequate Theory of Argument