Search

Copyright of Quaestio Iuris (QI) is the property of Editora da Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (EdUERJ) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The validity of the legal system was thought by jus philosophers such as Hans Kelsen and Herbert Hart, respectively, the fundamental hypothetical norm and the rule of recognition. This article will address these concepts, with the goal of conducting a comparative study between the two, and then pointing out their similarities and differences. To do so, we used the deductive approach and bibliographic research. At the end of the article, similarities were perceived, both being theoretical constructions of legal positivism of criterion of validity for the legal order, and differences, a logical-transcendental presupposition of validity (Kelsen) as an element of fact of validity (Hart). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]