See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/323762486

Doctrinal Legal Research

Article  in  SSRN Electronic Journal · January 2018

DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.3130525

CITATIONS READS
0 618

1 author:

Amrit Kharel
National Law College
3 PUBLICATIONS   0 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Securities Board of Nepal Silver Jubilee Publication 2018, SEBON, Lalitpur, Nepal pg. 237-252 (2018) View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Amrit Kharel on 25 November 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Doctrinal Legal Research
Amrit Kharel1

Abstract

Lawyers, judges and jurists have widely been using doctrinal research as a systematic means
of legal reasoning since nineteenth century. Doctrinal research is therefore established as the
traditional genre of research in legal field. Also known as, theory-testing or knowledge
building research in the legal academia, it deals with studying existing laws, related cases
and authoritative materials analytically on some specific matter. With its jurisprudential base
on positivism, doctrinal legal research is ‘research in law’ rather than ‘research about law’.
Distinguished from literature review, content analysis or historical legal research, doctrinal
legal research studies legal propositions based on secondary data of authorities such as
conventional legal theories, laws, statutory materials, court decisions, among others. This
paper intends to bring to light and analyse doctrinal legal research, its purpose, distinctive
characteristics and ongoing debate on methodological usage. The paper underscores the
need of convergence rather than rivalry between the doctrinal and non-doctrinal socio legal
research to address the problems in legal field.

Keywords

Legal research, doctrinal research, theoretical research, traditional research, library based
research, black-letter law research

Introduction
Legal research involves systematic examination of problems relating to law within
appropriate methodological framework. It deals with study of different aspects of law such as
principles, theories, process, historical development, comparative status, functioning of
judiciary, justice delivery, among others.

The systematic investigation of problems and of matters concerned with law such as codes,
acts etc. is legal research.2 Judges, lawyers, Law Commissions and researchers constantly do
research in law.3 Moreover, legal researcher can even go beyond the pure legal issues to
study practical problems of the outer world in relation to law. Legal research can be broadly

                                                            
1
  Author is an advocate practising at Supreme Court of Nepal especially in the area of corporate law. He holds
an LL.M. degree in Commercial Law and International Law from Tribhuvan University, Nepal. 
2
S.R. MYNENI, LEGAL RESEARCH METHODOLOGY, Allahabad Law Agency, India, 16 (1st ed. 4th prtg. 2006). 
3
Ibid. 

1 
 
classified as doctrinal and non-doctrinal legal research on the basis of focus of the study –
whether it examines theoretical and analytical aspects of 'law as it is' or it observes relevant
social facts interrelated with law.

Doctrinal legal research comprises in-depth analysis of the legal doctrine with its
development process and legal reasoning whereas non-doctrinal research seeks various social
facts, relationship of law with those facts, impact of law on society and such. Given that it has
gained wider acceptance from all quarters of legal professionals, namely the lawyers, the
judges, legal scholars and jurists, doctrinal legal research has remained as prominent research
method in law.

Definition

As the word ‘doctrinal’ is a derivative of 'doctrine', let's begin with defining the term
'doctrine'.

Dictionary Definition: Doctrine means “a principle, esp. a legal principle, that is widely
adhered to.”4

Terry Hutchinson and Nigel Duncan define, “The word ‘doctrine’ is derived from the Latin
‘doctrina’ which means ‘to instruct, a lesson, a precept’. The doctrine includes legal concepts
and principles of all types – cases, statutes, rules. Doctrine has been defined as ‘a synthesis of
rules, principles, norms, interpretive guidelines and values. It explains, makes coherent or
justifies a segment of the law as part of a larger system of law. Doctrines can be abstract,
binding or non-binding’.”5

Based on the observation of these two definitions, we come to know that legal doctrine
consists of body of rules associated with legal concept or principle that could have long
history of development. Hence, doctrinal legal research is all about thorough enquiry in legal
concepts, values, principles and existing legal texts such as statutes, case laws etc.

In addition, eminent legal scholars have defined 'doctrinal legal research' in their own
contexts to explain various aspects of the research method including its purpose, sources,
particular nature of study, process, significance etc.

                                                            
4
BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY 553 (9th ed. 2009).
5
Terry Hutchinson & Nigel Duncan, Defining and Describing What We Do: Doctrinal Legal Research, 17(1)
DEAKIN. L. REV. 84 (2012). 

2 
 
According to Prof. S. N. Jain, “Doctrinal research involves analysis of case law, arranging,
ordering and systematizing legal propositions and study of legal institutions through legal
reasoning or rational deduction.”6

Dr. S.R. Myneni has defined, “A doctrinal research means a research that has been carried
out on a legal proposition or propositions by way of analysing the existing statutory
provisions and cases by applying the reasoning power.”7

To Ian Dobinson and Francis Johns, “Doctrinal or theoretical legal research can be defined
in simple terms as research which asks what the law is in a particular area. It is concerned
with analysis of the legal doctrine and how it has been developed and applied. This type of
research is also known as pure theoretical research. It consists of either a simple research
directed at finding a specific statement of the law or a more complex and in depth analysis of
legal reasoning.”8

Paul Chynoweth states that doctrinal legal research is concerned with the formulation of
legal “doctrines” through the analysis of legal rules.9 He ascertains, legal doctrines clarify
ambiguities within rules, place them in a logical and coherent structure and describe their
relationship to other rules. Deciding on which rules to apply in a particular situation is made
easier by the existence of legal doctrines (for example, the doctrine of consideration within
the law of contract). He further describes, “Within the common law jurisdictions legal rules
are to be found within statutes and cases (the sources of law) but it is important to appreciate
that they cannot, in themselves, provide a complete statement of the law in any given
situation. This can only be ascertained by applying the relevant legal rules to the particular
facts of the situation under consideration.”10

Prof. Dr. Khushal Vibhute & Filipos Aynalem has defined doctrinal legal research as
research into legal doctrines through analysis of statutory provisions and cases by the
application of power of reasoning. Thus it gives emphasis on analysis of legal rules,

                                                            
6
S.N.Jain, Doctrinal and Non-Doctrinal Legal Research, in LEGAL RESEARCH AND METHODOLOGY, Indian
Law Institute, India, 68 (S.K. Verma & M. Afzal Wani eds., 2006).
7
MYNENI, supra note 1, at 32. 
8
Ian Dobinson & Francis Johns, Qualitative Legal Research, in RESEARCH METHODS FOR LAW, Edinburgh
University Press, Edinburgh, 18-19 (Michael McConville & Wing Hong Chui eds., 2007).
9
Paul Chynoweth, Legal Research in the Built Environment: A Methodological Framework, in ADVANCED
RESEARCH METHODS IN THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT, Wiley-Blackwell, UK, 29 (Andrew Knight & Les Ruddock
eds., 2008).  
10
Ibid.

3 
 
principles or doctrines.11 The authors duo compare and contrast doctrinal legal research with
non-doctrinal one as follows, “doctrinal legal research endeavours to develop theories, and
non-doctrinal legal research endeavours to see as to whether the theories, the doctrines, that
we have assumed are appropriate to apply in society at a given time, are still valid and
relevant.”12 Doctrinal legal research is, therefore, ‘research in law’ while non-doctrinal legal
research is ‘research about law’.13

Based on the definitions provided by the scholars, it is found that doctrinal legal research is
analytical study of existing laws, related cases and authoritative materials as a whole, on
some specific matter. It can be considered as relatively a theory-testing research which
endeavours to seek whether theory involved within subject is so far valid or not. Doctrinal
legal research deals with verifying existing knowledge on the legal issues. Since the society
itself is of changing nature as per the human needs, technological innovations and economic
transformations, knowledge on some particular area of law is also required to be replaced by
newer findings. While people keep following same thing in the society for a long, many
issues, and above all, efficacy of knowledge in some particular area of law maybe below par
at the moment. While society is changing day by day, proper and systematic review of the
existing knowledge on law is essential. Therefore doctrinal legal research works as
knowledge building research in the legal field.

Doctrinal research usually begins with developing legal proposition and the entire analysis of
the data from primary and secondary authorities is focused on testing the proposition. Say, for
example, while initiating a doctrinal legal research on the issues of precedents, a legal
researcher can construct a proposition that more than two third of the precedents set by the
Supreme Court lack convincing legal reasoning behind them. The researcher needs to study
bulk of data generated from primary and secondary authorities related to case laws or the
contents of the precedents set by Supreme Court within certain timeframe, prior studies on
such precedents, related authoritative books and academic writings etc. Researcher must
analyse the case laws and legal reasoning factor given in Supreme Court's judgements to
supplement something new knowledge.

As characterised by the study of legal texts, case laws, authoritative materials, researchers
often used the terms like ‘traditional legal research’, ‘theoretical legal research’, ‘library-
                                                            
11
KHUSHAL VIBHUTE & FILIPOS AYNALEM, LEGAL RESEARCH METHODS, Teaching Material, Justice and Legal
System Research Institute, Ethiopia, 70 (2009). 
12
Ibid.
13
Ibid, at 71. 

4 
 
based legal research’, ‘basic legal research’, ‘arm-chair legal research’ and even ‘black-letter
law research’ interchangeably to denote doctrinal legal research.

Jurisprudential Foundation
Doctrinal legal research has its jurisprudential root on the positive or analytical school of law.
As doctrinal legal research pursues what is the law in specific issue, its approach is merely
analytical, or in other words, influenced jurisprudentially by the positive school of thought.

Doctrinal research is underpinned by positivism and a view of the world where the law is
objective, neutral and fixed.14 In the words of prominent jurist of positive school, H.L.A.
Hart, doctrinal research “takes an internal, participant-oriented epistemological approach to
its object of study.”15 Thus doctrinal legal research is knowledge based research in law rather
than research about law. It does not go through the relationship of law with other disciplines
of society. Though law itself is of the normative character, which prescribes what people
ought to do or what ought not to do, doctrinal research does not dig out the queries on human
behaviour, conducts and relationship of law with other social ingredients.

As law is a normative science that regulates human conduct and relationship with backing of
sanction and at the same time, stability and certainty of law are social values to be pursued,
this posits doctrinal legal research at the primary concern to legal researcher.16 Doctrinal legal
research attempts to preserve consistency in law on the basis of legal reasoning. Researcher
conducting doctrinal research usually analyses the existing laws for the sake of stability and
certainty in law, which could ultimately results in consistency in justice delivery.

Historical Development
Doctrinal Legal Research has been dominant in the realm of research in law field for over
centuries. History of doctrinal legal research dates back to nineteenth century while legal
professionals were developed as clerks, law began developing as case law and the Court's
decisions went on updating the law in common legal system.

The doctrinal method lies at the basis of the common law17 and it has remained as prominent
legal research method all over the world to date. Dominant influence of doctrinal method was
seen in nineteenth and twentieth century legal research along with the rise of common law

                                                            
14
 HUTCHINSON & DUNCAN, supra note 4, at 116. 
15
H.L.A. HART, THE CONCEPT OF LAW, Clarendon Press, Oxford, UK (1961) cited in CHYNOWETH, supra note
8, at 30.
16
JAIN, supra note 5, at 68.
17
HUTCHINSON & DUNCAN, supra note 4, at 85.

5 
 
system. Even the notion of doctrinal also developed along with the doctrine of precedents.
The rules which were ‘evolved organically and slowly’18 and applied by the Courts in
common legal system repeatedly and consistently were considered as doctrinal legal
concepts. Following such notion of doctrinal, doctrinal research in legal concepts eventually
come into existence in the common legal system.

Until the first decade of nineteenth century, law itself was not established as an academic
discipline in the common law world.19 At the same time as law gradually developed into an
academic field in nineteenth and twentieth century in Europe especially in United Kingdom,
doctrinal research emerged as an academic instrument for legal research. Universities in the
common legal system mostly adopted doctrinal method as mainstream legal research method
till the last decade of the twentieth century.

Outside the European continent, in Canada and Australia, doctrinal legal research was
formally defined as a category of research in 1980s. The 1982 landmark study on the state of
legal research and scholarship in Canada, the Arthurs Report, added for the first time, non-
doctrinal research category, namely ‘fundamental research’ as a legal research which deals
with philosophical aspects related with other social genres. The committee formed in
Australia to review the research practices, headed by Dennis Pearce, categorised ‘doctrinal’ as
the prominent legal research followed by ‘reform-oriented’ and ‘theoretical’ research in its
report in early 1980s.20

Purpose of Doctrinal Legal Research

The following points respond to the query – why doctrinal research is important in law. The
major purposes of doctrinal legal research comprise, but are not limited to the following:

a. To construct new legal theories, principles and doctrines, to test them and add new
knowledge in the legal scholarship.
b. To help maintain continuity, consistency and certainty of law.21
c. To resolve day-to-day client matters as it is more manageable and outcomes are more
predictable due to its focus on established sources.22

                                                            
18
Ibid. 
19
Ibid, at 97.
20
Ibid.
21
VIBHUTE & AYNALEM, supra note 10, at 71.
22
 Ashish Kumar Singhal & Ikramuddin Malik, Doctrinal and Socio-legal Methods of Research: Merits and
Demerits, 2(7) EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH JOURNAL 253 (2012). 

6 
 
 d. To advise courts or clients about the application of legal doctrine to specific cases,
transactions, or other legal events. To critically examine the judicial opinions and in
case of conflicts between the decisions of different court, to suggest the resolution to
those conflicts.23
e. To provide lawyers, judges and others with the tools needed to reach decisions on an
immense variety of problems, usually with very limited time at disposal.24
f. To develop a theory that tries to explain how law or areas of law fit together; to
conduct comparative and historical inquiries describing an earlier era or contrasting
legal regime; to expose tensions within a body of law, legal practices or institutions;
and to highlight these tensions and contradictions and attempt to link them to larger
psychological, social, or philosophic difficulties.25

The main purpose of doctrinal legal research is to improve the substantial part of the law by
means of which could result in achieving the broader goal of law. The ultimate goal of law is
justice rather than mere legal procedures, texts and jargons. Thus doctrinal legal research is
often employed in the areas of enriching legal contents, coding and even interpretation of the
legal statutes.

Doctrinal legal research is highly academic in nature and its purpose is to build new
principles, add some new knowledge and provide foundation for study on other various
socio-legal issues.

Laws should be made in a right way and legal contents are required to be made strong. In the
legislation process, very often, lawmakers deliberately leave some sensitive part of law
without interpretation with the view that there are learned judges to interpret the issues if
necessary. Thus judges are responsible to carry out deep study in doctrinal manner in order to
avoid miscarriage of justice while giving judgment on particular issues. That sort of judgment
may remain as case law for many years or even for many decades governing the particular
issue.

Doctrinal legal research boosts confidence of the judges, lawyers and the jurists. A lawyer
can do a good legal research in doctrinal approach even during the litigating stage for a
particular client. This can give input to the judge for valid reasoning while deciding the case.
                                                            
23
Adilah Abd Razak, Understanding Legal Research, 4 INTEGRATION & DISSEMINATION, Faculty of Economics
and Management, Universiti Putra Malaysia 19–20 (2009). 
24
SOCIOLOGY OF LAW 9 (Vilhelm Aubert ed. 1969) cited in JAIN, supra note 5, at 79. 
25
 HUTCHINSON & DUNCAN, supra note 4, at 104. 

7 
 
Backed by the massive knowledge acquired from doctrinal legal research, judges can be full
confident upon what they are doing and such conscious rulings of the court could result in
development of new concept in law. Public Interest Litigation and Judicial Activism are the
exemplary concepts thriving of late which can be considered as the consequence of doctrinal
legal research. Doctrinal Legal research, in proactive manner, is much essential to introduce
new concepts and positive changes in law practices, judicial decisions, administration of
justice and overall justice delivery mechanism.

Hence legal practitioners, judges and jurists are required to conduct doctrinal legal research
systematically based on the wide range of data deposited in the library in the forms of
principles, doctrines, statutory materials, treaties, relevant international cases, judicial
writings, authoritative books etc. Doctrinal research can yield a clear understanding of
particular legal issue in the very limited span of time.

Research Approach, Process and Steps

As a doctrinal legal researcher does not deal with merely counting the number of laws related
to certain fact, quantitative approach of research does not meet the purpose of this sort of
research. Doctrinal researcher thoroughly analyses the relevant legal texts to interpret what
law exists regarding the particular context and thus the approach of analysis in doctrinal legal
research is always a qualitative one.

The analytical, legal reasoning aspect of doctrinal research process is necessarily a qualitative
one. The outcome varies according to the expertise of the individual scholar and cannot be
replicated exactly by another researcher. When a researcher undertakes doctrinal work, it is
totally dependent on the voice and experience of the individual. Doctrinal research requires a
specific language, extensive knowledge and a specific set of skills involving precise
judgment, detailed description, depth of thought and accuracy.26

Doctrinal research involves ‘the search for the particular rather than the general’ and ‘the
non-probabilistic nature of statements of law’.27

Critics of doctrinal research often attempt to dub it as ‘armchair’ or ‘handicapped’ type of

research. However, conducting doctrinal research is not such an easy task since it comprises
the systematic process of locating and analysing various authoritative legal texts, case laws
and similar nature of prior studies as well. Doctrinal researcher has to go through immense
                                                            
26
 Ibid, at 116. 
27
Ibid, at 117. 

8 
 
data located from the authoritative sources, study numbers of earlier research reports, review
existing case laws and in due course, analyse the facts on legal reasoning basis to test the
proposition and draw the conclusion of overall study. Thus a doctrinal researcher has to crack
the hard nut while passing through different processes to make something new inferences
based on the analysis of the existing legal authorities.

Prominent scholar Ernest M Jones has described the process involved in doctrinal research in
these words –

Typically, a legal scholar undertaking doctrinal research takes one or more legal
propositions as a starting point and focus of his study. Research then takes place in the
law library, where the legal scholar tries to locate all relevant appellate decisions and
all discussions of his proposition in treatises, texts, encyclopaedias and legal
periodicals. After reading and ‘analyzing’ these materials, the scholar formulates his
conclusions and writes up his study. The report of the study may offer a new
formulation of the action in reliance concept, or occasionally a model statute to
replace the concept may be proposed. If the scholar takes a concept from a statute as
the focus of his research, the sources of his data likely will include not only that
statute, but its legislative history and if they exist, comparable statutes in other
jurisdictions.28

Doctrinal method, as described by Hutchinson and Duncan29, is normally a two part process
which involves locating the sources of the law and then interpreting and analysing the text.
The methodology used by legal researchers may be the same at its basis but the process and the
output differs among the writing genres.30

There are obviously varying degrees of complexity within doctrinal legal research. The range
lies from practical problem-solving to ‘straightforward descriptions of (new) laws, with some
incidental interpretative comments’, to ‘innovative theory building (systematisation). There is
firstly the problem-based doctrinal research methodology used by practitioners and students.

                                                            
28
 Ernest M Jones, Some Current Trends in Legal Research, in LEGAL RESEARCH AND METHODOLOGY, Indian
Law Institute, India, 32–33 (S.K. Verma & M. Afzal Wani eds., 2006). 
29
HUTCHINSON & DUNCAN, supra note 4, at 110.
30
 Ibid, at 100. 

9 
 
This approach is predicated on solving a specific legal problem and normally includes the
following steps:31

a. Assembling relevant facts

b. Identifying the legal issues
c. Analysing the issues with a view to searching for the law
d. Reading background material (including legal dictionaries, legal encyclopaedias,
textbooks, law reform and policy papers, journal articles)
e. Locating primary material including legislation, delegated legislation and case law
f. Synthesising all the issues in context
g. Coming to a tentative conclusion

Distinctive Characteristics
Doctrinal legal research is distinguished from other non-doctrinal legal researches on the
basis of data employed during the study. Doctrinal research is always based on secondary
data that come from authorities. Though data can be retrieved from both primary and
secondary authorities, doctrinal research never deals with the primary data of social facts
collected first-hand from surveys, field study or any other empirical means. Doctrinal
researcher analyses available secondary data from authoritative sources which have already
been collected and processed by other else than the researcher. In doctrinal research, usually
researcher analyses secondary available data, which come from statutes, laws, judicial
decisions and other legal texts, to verify the legal proposition and reach to a conclusion.
Doctrinal legal research gets its data basically from authoritative sources, either from law
itself or legal texts having some sense of sovereign or authority in it. Most of the legal
scholars consequently prefer doctrinal research due to its hassle free nature – not required to
wander various places to gather first-hand information from field studies.

As the place and source of data, namely, substantive legal rules, doctrines, or concepts and
judicial decisions thereon, required for doctrinal legal research is law library, doctrinal legal
research is nicknamed as ‘arm-chair research’, or ‘basic or fundamental research’.32

Legal research is all about authorities. Primary and secondary authorities are always essential
to test, analyse and verify the legal propositions. Primary authorities include the actual rules
or statements of law created by authentic governmental bodies such as constitutions, statutes,

                                                            
31
 Ibid. 
32
 VIBHUTE & AYNALEM, supra note 10, at 71. 

10 
 
legislations and codes which come from the legislature, judgements and opinions from the
Courts, and even regulations, rulings of the administrative agencies. Secondary authorities
include materials that explain or comment on areas of law such as law review articles,
treatises, books, restatements of the law, legal encyclopaedias and so on. Primary authorities
can be either mandatory (binding) or persuasive (non-binding). The legislations and case laws
of particular controlling jurisdiction are mandatory to that jurisdiction whereas Court
decisions of foreign jurisdictions that are operating under different statutory frameworks
could not be mandatory in the domestic context. Likewise, secondary authorities are also
used as only the persuasive authorities.

To a large extent, it is the doctrinal aspect of law that makes legal research distinctive and
provides an often under-recognised parallel to ‘discovery’ in the physical sciences.33 Thus
doctrinal legal research is itself distinct from literature review, content analysis and historical
research methods.

Hutchinson and Duncan, in the following lines, have discerned doctrinal research from
literature review:

The literature review is basically asking – What has been said about the topic
previously? What testimony is available on your topic? ‘Testimony’ can include the
secondary literature – texts, journal articles, government reports, policy documents, law
reform documents and media reports. Just like any other research, doctrinal research
requires background research of secondary commentary and sources as a first step.
However doctrinal legal research is more than simply a literature review.34

Distinguishing doctrinal and historical method Hutchinson and Duncan have stated,

Unlike historical research which seeks to find the truth through considering the
perspective and view of every actor whatever their social status or role in events, and
examining every conceivable range of data, doctrinal research for the most part focuses
on ‘privileged voices’. As an example, in doctrinal research, these voices or versions of
the truth are those of the judges in case law and the parliament in legislation.35

While comparing with content analysis, doctrinal legal research can be distinguished on the
basis of legal reasoning component, which is the crux of the latter but not found in the
former. Once again, according to Hutchinson and Duncan,
                                                            
33
 HUTCHINSON & DUNCAN, supra note 4, at 99. 
34
Ibid, at 104-105.
35
 Ibid, at 108. 

11 
 
 Content analysis includes the process of reading judgments, legislation and policy
documents as text rather than reading for the substance of the ‘law’ and legal reasoning.
It is the process of quantifying the use of words and then examining the language, and
not simply what is being said or the meaning of the words in the first instance. Content
analysis identifies patterns in text and the themes in bodies of documents. Critical legal
scholars use the technique to identify meaning behind the words of judicial and
legislative text. It is a way of deconstructing text rather than reading and synthesising
meaning from the text. It is, therefore, distinguished from most doctrinal analysis.36

Therefore the distinctive characteristics of doctrinal legal research can be listed as follows:

a. Doctrinal legal research is legal propositions based study

b. Conventional legal theory, law, statutory materials and court decisions report are the
sources for doctrinal legal research
c. It studies the law as it exists and not concerned about how it should be or even do not
seek public opinion about how it should be
d. It is research in law not research about law
e. It is distinguished from literature review, content analysis or historical legal research
f. The bulk of legal research is a product of this approach.37

Limitations of Doctrinal Legal Research

Availability of the reliable data is the biggest challenge in conducting doctrinal research.
Researcher must be competent enough to identify the reliable data and make sure the data is
of some kind of authority, either primary or secondary.

Funding providers often criticise doctrinal legal researcher for being vague due to operating
within the arcane paradigm. At a time when competition for limited research funds is
becoming more intense, and in which interdisciplinary work is highly valued and non-
lawyers are involved in the assessment of grant applications, lawyer-applicants who engage
in doctrinal research need to be more open and articulate about their methods.38

Unless researcher is much acquainted with limitations of the doctrinal method, research
outcomes could possibly be ‘too theoretical, too technical, uncritical, conservative, trivial and

                                                            
36
 Ibid, at 109. 
37
 JONES, supra note 27, at 33. 
38
 HUTCHINSON & DUNCAN, supra note 4, at 85. 

12 
 
without due consideration of the social, economical and political significance of the legal
process’.39

In studying, the context which the law operates and how the law relates to and affects that
context, doctrinal methodology does not offer an adequate framework for addressing issues
that arise because it assumes that the law exists in an objective doctrinal vacuum rather than
within a social framework or context. The law does not operate in a vacuum. It operates
within society and affects the society. There is, therefore, scope for adopting and adapting
other methodologies utilized in other subjects in order to have more illuminated view of the
law and its functions. Lawyers may need more than doctrinal or library based research skills
in order to make their research more relevant for the wider world.40

Latest Trends: Worldwide Debate on Methodology

Lawyers, judges and jurists had widely used doctrinal research as a systematic means of legal
reasoning in nineteenth and twentieth century. Doctrinal research is therefore established as
the traditional genre of research in legal field. Though doctrinal researchers were much more
concerned to add perfection to legal contents and issues, law in reality was not functioning
perfectly in various social contexts. This realisation led to the advent of newer research
approach in second half of the twentieth century – socio-legal research – which had in its
focus, the study about relationship of law with different aspects of society. Study of law in
isolation could not always contribute in making and institutionalising right kind of law for
human society. As a consequence, newer approach of studying law with socio-legal
perspective was emerged in the international legal research arena. Since then, debates on
usage and prevalence of methodology in legal research are ongoing as a common
phenomenon among and between the academia worldwide.

Both in the U.S. and in Europe there is a debate on methodology in legal research.
Doctrinalists and multidisciplinarians appear to be in different camps fighting over the ‘true
nature’ of legal scholarship.41 Nevertheless, socio-legal research has its footing on the
foundation of the outcomes of doctrinal legal research. Socio-legal research complements
doctrinal research in the part of pragmatic law development process. Gestel and Miclitz has
implied upon the interrelationship between doctrinal and non-doctrinal empirical research in
the given words,
                                                            
39
 SINGHAL & MALIK, supra note 21. 
40
Ibid. 
41
ROB VAN GESTEL & HANS-W. MICLITZ, REVITALIZING DOCTRINAL RESEARCH IN EUROPE: WHAT ABOUT
METHODOLOGY? Abstract (European University Institute, Italy, EUI Working Papers Law 2011/05, 2011).

13 
 
 It is just as impossible to undertake good multidisciplinary or empirical research without
a proper understanding of legal doctrine as it is to conduct solid doctrinal research with
at least some knowledge of facts and fact finding. One needs this understanding, not in
the last place, in order to be able to raise the right questions without making a mockery
of law and legal theory. If the opposite were true, things would be a lot easier and there
would probably not have been such a long history of frictions between legal formalism,
naturalism and (new) legal realism in the U.S. and in Europe.42

Society and various societal factors contribute in framing the law and ultimately the same law
governs the society. For this reason, relationship between the law and society should be
studied well for proper functioning of law along with the legal doctrines. Thus socio-legal
research and doctrinal research are equally important to press forward the development of
law and justice delivery in prosperous society.

Doctrinalists, empiricists, comparatists, legal historians, law and economists and others co-
exist in the new legal world and the quality of their work should be judged according to the
rules of the discipline and not be determined by preferences for a particular type of
research.43

Conclusion
The objective and philosophy of doctrinal researcher has to be the same as that of
sociological jurisprudence, that is, social engineering through law.44 Law society research
cannot thrive on a weak infrastructure base of doctrinal type analyses of the authoritative
legal materials.45

Convergence rather than rivalry between the doctrinal and non-doctrinal socio legal research
could only be the best approach to tackle with burning problems in the legal field. Both of the
legal research method should complement each other's limitations where applicable.

Legal issues coupled with manifold of the social facts regarding economy, environment,
culture, psychology, information technology, religion and such are studied while conducting
socio-legal research. To conduct such studies, proper foundation of doctrinal analysis of
statutes, legal principles and case laws from authorities can only be supplied thorough the

                                                            
42
GESTEL & MICLITZ, supra note 40, at 28.
43
 ROB VAN GESTEL, HANS-W. MICLITZ & MIGUEL POIARES MADURO, METHODOLOGY IN THE NEW LEGAL
WORLD, 23 (European University Institute, Italy, EUI Working Papers Law 2012/13, 2012). 
44
JAIN, supra note 5, at 77.
45
 Ibid, at 79. 

14 
 
outcomes of doctrinal researches. Series of studies and knowledge accumulation on the
problems related to legal provisions, proceedings, justice delivery, among others, through
doctrinal and non-doctrinal approaches could be undertaken and if this led to similar nature of
outcomes generation for time and again, it may perhaps result in paradigm shift in the
policies.

The socio-legal impact study of law on the basis of public opinion can bring practical world
problem to the policymaker's sight. But to make the public opinion mature, the foundation
again could be doctrinal research outcomes. Good opinion formation always depends on how
one has acquired right information about the subject matter. Doctrinal legal researches give
inputs for public to reach at well-informed decisions, resulting in mature and right public
opinion. The depository knowledge generated from doctrinal legal researches could be basis
for public opinion formation on legal reforms, impact of particular law and those public
opinions can be brought as data through the empirical studies. To conclude, lots of good
things can be generated harmonising doctrinal and non-doctrinal legal research methods
when it comes to taking the legal scholarship at new height or solving the legal problems in
real life situation.

15 
 
 Select Bibliography

Black's Law Dictionary (9th ed.). (2009).

Chynoweth, Paul (2008). Legal Research in the Built Environment: A Methodological
Framework. In Andrew Knight & Les Ruddock (Eds.), Advanced Research Methods in the
Built Environment. London:Wiley-Blackwell
Dobinson, Ian & Johns, Francis (2007). Qualitative Legal Research, In Michael McConville
& Wing Hong Chui (Eds.), Research Methods for Law. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University
Press
Gestel, Rob Van et.al. (2012). Methodology in the New Legal World. EUI Working Papers
Law 2012/13. Italy: European University Institute.
Gestel, Rob Van & Miclitz, Hans-W. (2011). Revitalizing Doctrinal Research in Europe:
What about Methodology? EUI Working Papers Law 2011/05. Italy: European University
Institute.
Hutchinson, Terry & Duncan, Nigel (2012). Defining and Describing What We Do: Doctrinal
Legal Research. Deakin. L. Rev, 17 (1).
Jain, S.N.(2006). Doctrinal and Non-Doctrinal Legal Research. In S.K. Verma & M. Afzal
Wani (Eds.), Legal Research and Methodology. New Delhi: Indian Law Institute.
Jones, Ernest M. (2006). Some Current Trends in Legal Research. In S.K. Verma & M. Afzal
Wani (Eds.), Legal Research and Methodology. New Delhi: Indian Law Institute.
Myneni, S.R. (2006). Legal Research Methodology. India: Allahabad Law Agency.
Razak, Adilah Abd (2009). Understanding Legal Research. Integration & Dissemination, 4.
Malaysia: Faculty of Economics and Management, Universiti Putra.
Singhal, Ashish Kumar & Malik, Ikramuddin (2012). Doctrinal and Socio-legal Methods of
Research: Merits and Demerits. Educational Research Journal, 2(7).
Vibhute, Khushal & Aynalem Filipos (2009). Legal Research Methods, Teaching Material.
Ethiopia: Justice and Legal System Research Institute

16 
 

View publication stats