Contours of Discretion and Arbitrariness in Law: Conceptual Distinctions and Typologies

This article maps the conceptual contours of discretion and arbitrariness in law, highlighting their precise distinction and the conditions that separate legitimate discretionary action from impermissible arbitrariness. Discretion is characterized as reasoned, justified on objective factors, and accountable decision-making within legal boundaries, whereas arbitrariness arises when decisions lack justification, rational coherence, or adherence to legal principles. Drawing on Hart’s legal philosophy, legal dogmatics, and case law, the study identifies the elements that sustain lawful discretion and prevent arbitrariness. Furthermore, it introduces a typology of arbitrariness, distinguishing procedural and substantial arbitrariness.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Problema Anuario de Filosofía y Teoría del Derecho
Published
2026-10-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.22201/iij.24487937e.2027.21.21174
Primary Topic
Comparative constitutional jurisprudence studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Contours of Discretion and Arbitrariness in Law: Conceptual Distinctions and Typologies

Elena Corchete Prats
1 links
Problema Anuario de Filosofía y Teoría del Derecho
Comparative constitutional jurisprudence studies
article

Contours of Discretion and Arbitrariness in Law: Conceptual Distinctions and Typologies

Elena Corchete Prats
article en

Abstract

This article maps the conceptual contours of discretion and arbitrariness in law, highlighting their precise distinction and the conditions that separate legitimate discretionary action from impermissible arbitrariness. Discretion is characterized as reasoned, justified on objective factors, and accountable decision-making within legal boundaries, whereas arbitrariness arises when decisions lack justification, rational coherence, or adherence to legal principles. Drawing on Hart’s legal philosophy, legal dogmatics, and case law, the study identifies the elements that sustain lawful discretion and prevent arbitrariness. Furthermore, it introduces a typology of arbitrariness, distinguishing procedural and substantial arbitrariness.

Problema Anuario de Filosofía y Teoría del Derecho
Stockholm University (SE)
Peace, justice, and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Comparative constitutional jurisprudence studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon