Iǧtihād of the Jordanian Šarīa Judiciary in the Interpretation of Legal Terms An Applied Study
Arab Law Quarterly, ISSN: 1573-0255, Page: 1-16
2022
- 1Citations
- 3Usage
- 5Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations1
- Citation Indexes1
- Usage3
- Abstract Views3
- Captures5
- Readers5
Article Description
This article studies a collection of legal terms and their interpretation by Jordanian courts in matters related to the Šarīa. It outlines the method through which the meaning of terms is determined by returning to Islamic foundations of jurisprudence (uūl al-fiqh), a source specified by Jordanian law which can be used to define legal terms as well as the context, scope, and application of legal texts. The article examines a set of judicial interpretations (iǧtihād) of terms which have carried different points of view in both courts of first instance and appeals. The methodology of the study combines between theoretical discussions derived from Islamic foundations of jurisprudence (uūl al-fiqh) and the application of interpretive principles through a focus on determining the purpose of the legislator. The article highlights the role of the contemporary Muslim judiciary in developing personal status law through the interpretation of terms that carry multiple meanings and explores the essential principles relied upon in this process, establishing a path for future legal reform.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85142708191&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15730255-bja10125; https://brill.com/view/journals/alq/aop/article-10.1163-15730255-bja10125/article-10.1163-15730255-bja10125.xml; https://zuscholars.zu.ac.ae/works/5476; https://zuscholars.zu.ac.ae/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=6508&context=works
Brill
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know