Argument from precedent in legal interpretation of texts of legal acts from the perspective of a derivative concept of legal interpretation

The aim of this article is to ascertain whether in the Polish legal culture in which precedent is not a legislative fact, it can become an argument in the process of judicial interpretation. The article posits that an analysis of precedent as an argument in judicial interpretation must be carried out in relation to a particular concept (or theory) of legal interpretation. Hence, it adopts the Maciej Zieliński’s (derivative) concept of legal interpretation as a point of reference for understanding “legal interpretation”. The choice is based on the following reasons: 1) this concept offers a complex approach to legal interpretation (which assumes that interpretation can be concluded if three directives have been applied by an interpreter: linguistic, systemic and functional); 2) this concept considers the realistic elements of legal interpretation in the form of directives linked to the interpretative findings achieved in judicial practice; 3) this concept stipulates that legal interpretation has certain roles, which allow establishing whether the outcome of legal reasoning is within the scope of the interpretation or whether it constitutes a “normative novelty”. As a result of this analysis, it can be concluded that depending on the content of the directives of interpretation adopted in a given legal culture, the proceedings of the entity applying a law will have either an interpretative or a legislative character and will consequently determine how invoking earlier court judgments in legal interpretation will be classified.