INDEX

INTRODUCTION 1

THE PURPOSE OF LEGAL RESEARCH 2

DOCTRINAL RESEARCH 3

NON-DOCTRINAL RESEARCH 8

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN DOCTRINAL AND NON-DOCTRINAL

RESEARCH 12

CONCLUSION 13
 INTRODUCTION

Research is basically a scientific systematic investigation into and study of materials and
sources in order to establish facts. The origin of the word lies in the French word “re”
meaning ‘’expressing intensive force” and “meaning “to search” .In a general sense it can be
said that research includes gathering of data, information and facts for the advancement of
knowledge. But in a formal sense research is performing a methodological study in order to
prove a hypothesis or finding the answer of a specific question. Research must be scientific,
systematic, objective and must follow a series of steps and a standard protocol.

Legal Research is a Research pertaining to law. It is the systematic investigation of a legal

fact that increases the sum of knowledge pertaining to law. It is an addition of something to
an existing knowledge, or refutes something into an existing knowledge. Law as per legal
research attracts judicial pronouncements, the prior stages of making and unmaking law,
historical antecedents, subsequent.

There are different methods of research that may be applicable in law. They can be
characterized as multidisciplinary, doctrinal, empirical or non-doctrinal research. The main
two types of legal research are:

A. Doctrinal Research:

It is a theoretical research and it is pure in nature. Conventional legal sources like reports of
committees, legal history, judicial pronouncements, facts passed by legislature and
parliament etc. are the sources of doctrinal legal research.

B. Non-Doctrinal Research:

It is also known as empirical research or socio-legal research and relies on experience and
observation. It is a trans-boundary research but its foundation is on doctrinal research only.
Non-doctrinal legal research tries to investigate through empirical data, how law and legal
institutions affect human attitudes and what impact on society they create.
 THE PURPOSE OF LEGAL RESEARCH

Kiss am (1988) listed six overlapping purposes of legal scholarship. One of the reasons for
conducting legal research is to analyse the law by reducing, breaking and separating the law
into separate elements. It can be as simple as examining and explaining new statutes and
statutory schemes or as complex as explaining, interpreting and criticising specific cases or
statutes. Another reason is “to fuse the disparate elements of cases and statutes together into
coherent or useful legal standards or general rules” . The product of this research is legal
standard that is consistent with, explains, or justifies a group of specific legal decisions. For
instance, the analyses of cases and regulations which govern contract formation in view of
electronic commerce development to scrutinise the applicability or inapplicability of the
existing legal standards to the new format of contracting may suggest new legal standard. In
addition, some studies are done to look at doctrinal or theoretical issue. The research finding
is applied in advising courts or clients about the application of legal doctrine to specific cases,
transactions, or other legal events. It may also criticise judicial opinions and in case of
conflicts between the decisions of different court, suggests the resolution to those conflicts.
Furthermore, legal research can also be performed by scholars who wanted to provide
teaching materials for students. The end products include books and modules. Similarly,
some scholars performed legal research to understand the legal doctrine and the law as it is.
To achieve this objective the researcher examines the causes, the consequence and the
interpretation of the relevant legal doctrine and legal practices in its social context. The result
of the research highlights among others the practical usefulness of the law and the
significance or insignificance of any given theory. Finally, the last reason for doing legal
research is to acquire an understanding of the legal subject while arguing for a better way of
doing things. A researcher who performs this type of research critics and comments legal
doctrine and practices from the perspective of different sciences likes economics, politics and
sociology
 DOCTRINAL RESEARCH

1 .CONCEPT

Doctrinal research is concerned with legal prepositions and doctrines. The sources of data are
legal and appellate court decisions.

Doctrinal research, also called traditional research, is not concerned with people but with
documents and differs from the non-doctrinal also called empirical research.

The doctrinal research means a research that has been carried out by way of analysing the
existing statutory provisions and cases by applying the reasoning power, and that has been
carried out on a legal proposition or propositions.

Doctrinal research involves analysis of case law, arranging, ordering and systematizing legal
propositions and study of legal institutions through legal reasoning or rational deduction. One
of the purposes of the traditional legal research is ascertaining a legal rule for the purpose of
solving a problem. Hence quality of doctrinal research depends upon the source material on
which the researcher depends upon for his study.

As the major portion of the research methodology concerns with the identification of
authoritative the sources and use of techniques to find them out, a doctrinal researcher should
know how to use a law library. The laws on social welfare have placed great burden on courts
of law, in a dynamic society. There will be gaps in statutes and the courts have to evolve
doctrinal principles, standards and norms, generally. Further, there will be ambiguity in the
statutory language. A word may become vague during its application to a particular case,
which appears to be clear during the enactment of law.

Doctrinal research asks what the law is on a particular issue. 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
(M.C. Cornville and Wing, 2007). Researchers who dwelt in this type of research are
concerned with the philosophy of law and the topics involve are restricted. They mostly focus
on the nature of law and legal authority; the theories behind particular substantive areas of
law, such as torts or contracts; and the nature of rights, justice and political authority. Others
may study the legal decision making process, and the theories of legal interpretation and legal
reasoning (Gordon, 2008). An example of a pure theoretical work is found in The Principles
of Justice by Wright (2000). In this article the researcher examined the concept of justice by
looking into the distributive and corrective theories of justice. Meanwhile, in Implying Good
Faith in Contracts: Some Recent Developments, Shaikh (1993) examined the application of
the good faith principle in Malaysian Contract Law. Some researchers use this approach to
study legal doctrine and the underlying theory behind the doctrine. In A Corrective Justice
Theory of Antitrust Regulation, (Robertson, 2000), the author focused on the use of classical
corrective justice principles as an explanation for per se rules that categorically prohibit
concerted and unilateral business activity that unfairly injures economic competitors.
Meanwhile, Spector (2006) in his work Promises, Commitments, and the Foundations of
Contract Law: A Contract Arian Approach to Unconscionability concentrated on the freedom
of contract theory and the rules that govern the unconscionability of a contract. Finally, Cahill
(2005) examined the application of the natural law theory in the Malaysian Constitution in
the Relationship between Natural Rights Theory and the Doctrine of Constitutionalism
Encapsulated within the Federal Constitution.

2. ESSENTIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF DOCTRINAL RESEARCH

1 This type of research involves analysis of legal propositions or legal concepts.

2. In this type of research a conventional source of data is used.

3. Legal propositions from enactments, administrative rules and regulations, cases of courts
etc. can be a part of doctrinal legal research.

4. Doctrinal Research includes research into legal concepts and principles of all types ' cases,
statutes and rules. Doctrinal Research focuses on legal data gathered from case laws,
legislation, journal articles, law reform reports, parliamentary materials, policy documents,
relevant text books etc.

5. Doctrinal Research is a research “into” law and legal concepts and not “about” law. It is
theoretical and pure in nature and hence called arm-chair research.
 6. Doctrine is a synthesis of various rules, principles, norms, interpretive guidelines and
values. The term doctrinal in case of doctrinal legal research is closely linked with the
doctrine of precedent.

7. Doctrinal Research is a research into the black letters of law. Here, ascertainment of law is
necessary.

8. Doctrinal Researcher makes his research based on secondary data which is relevant to his
proposition.

3. TOOLS OF DOCTRINAL LEGAL RESEARCH

1. Statutory materials.

2. Reports of committees.

3. Legal History.

4. Judgments, Case Reports and Case Digests.

5. Standard Textbooks and reference books.

6. Legal Periodicals.

7. Commentaries.

8. Govt. Reports.

9. Parliamentary & Debates.

10. Resources.

4. MERITS OF DOCTRINAL RESEARCH:

1. In a doctrinal Research, the researcher is always engaged in research work, analysis of case
laws and judicial pronouncements etc. unlike that in case of non-doctrinal research. Also,
doctrinal research is less time consuming.
2. It provides the lawyers, judges and others with the instruments needed to reach a legal
decision.

3. Doctrinal legal Research helps in continuity, consistency and certainty of law. Such a
research contributes in our understanding of law, legal concepts, legal doctrines etc.

4. Such a Research provides quick answers to the legal problems.

5. Such a Research helps in pointing out the inbuilt loopholes, gaps, ambiguities or
inconsistencies in the substantive law

6. Doctrinal Research always helps informing a strong and solid basis for the non-doctrinal
research.

7. Doctrinal Researcher systemizes the legal propositions that are a result of his rational
reasoning and critical analysis. In this process he may initiate a new Theory in the concerned
field of law.

8. Doctrinal Research helps in predicting how the legal principles, concepts or doctrines
would proceed in future.

5. DEMERITS OF DOCTRINAL RESEARCH

1. Doctrinal legal research is basically the result of individual analysis of a researcher and the
perception of a legal fact of one researcher may vary from another researcher. However, each
of these perceptions is equally convincing and logical. Thus, doctrinal legal research is
subjective in nature.

2. In the recent past where there has been an economic, political and social change, more
emphasis is given on the people and institution regulated by law. Law has been attributed
with the role of social engineering. There are a number of facts which lie outside the legal
system which may be responsible for non-implementation or poor implementation of a given
piece of legislation. But, doctrinal legal research do not look into these factors. Doctrinal
Research does not go beyond the sphere of law.

3. In many cases it is seen that there is a gap between the actual social behaviour and the
behaviour demanded by the legal norm. Doctrinal Research does not address these gaps.
 4. Doctrinal legal researcher puts emphasis on traditional sources of law and judicial
pronouncements of appellate courts. The actual practice of lower courts and administrative
agencies with judicial and quasi-judicial functions remain unexplored because their
judgments are not reported.

5. In case of a doctrinal research, the researcher looks into statutory materials, judicial
pronouncements, case reports and principles or doctrines relating to it in order to deduce legal
propositions. His inquiry into law however does not get support from social facts or values.
As a result, these kinds of researches become merely theoretical and far away from social
reality. Such a research is incomplete and inadequate.

NON-DOCTRINAL RESEARCH
1. CONCEPT

Non-doctrinal research, also known as social-legal research, is research that employs methods
taken from other disciplines to generate empirical data that answers research questions. It can
be a problem, policy, or a reform of the existing law. A legal non-doctrinal finding can be
qualitative or quantitative, and a dogmatic non-doctrinal finding can be part of a large-scale
project. The non-doctrinal approach allows the researcher to conduct research that analyses
the law from the perspective of other science disciplines, and to employ those disciplines in
drafting the law. For example, in the behavioural sciences, there is a standard form of
consumer contract that contributes to the study of psychological phenomena:

1. The tendency of consumers not to read the standard form contract,

2. The inability of consumers to evaluate the terms of the contract correctly once they do read
and

3. The ability of sellers to deal with consumers. Because it uses non-sectarian legal
experimental data, it provides vital insights about the law in context, i.e. how the law works
out in the real world. Legal research is experimental and valuable in detecting and explaining
practices and procedures in legal and regulatory systems. It is also valuable in the settling
disputes, and impacts the legal phenomena of social institutions and businesses. Similarly,
experimental legal research in economics applies legal analysis, statistical inference, and
economic modelling, to the core areas of national and international law, such as tort,
property, contracts, criminal law, law enforcement and litigation. Earlier research can be used
to analyse the economics of legal negligence theory

Non-doctrinal research, also known as socio-legal research is a legal research that employs
methods taken from other disciplines to generate empirical data to answer research questions.
It can be a problem, policy or law reform based. Non-doctrinal legal research can be
qualitative or quantitative. Doctrinal and non-doctrinal research could be part of a large scale
project (M.C. Cornville and Wing, 2007). Non-doctrinal approach allows the researcher to
perform inter disciplinary research where he analyses law from the perspective of other
sciences and employs these sciences in the formulation of the law. For example, a work by
Becker (2007) on Behavioural Science and Consumer Standard Form Contract examined the
psychological phenomena that contribute to
 (i) consumers’ tendency not to read standard form contract,
(ii) consumers’ inability to correctly evaluate contract terms once they do read them;
and
(iii) Seller’s ability to manipulate consumers. Because non-doctrinal legal research
uses empirical data, it provides vital insights into the law in context, i.e. how the
law works in the real world. Empirical legal research is valuable in revealing and
explaining the practices and procedures of legal, regulatory, redress and dispute
resolution systems and the impact of legal phenomena on a range of social
institutions, business and citizens (Gann, et al, 2006). Similarly, an empirical
research in law and economics applies legal analysis, statistical inference and
economic modelling to fundamental areas of national and international law such
as tort liability, property, contracts, criminal law, law enforcement and litigation.
An earlier work which used economics analysis of the law is a work by Posner
(1972) on A Theory of Negligence. In this work Posner developed a theory “to
explain the social function of negligence concept and of the fault system of
accident liability…”. He then tested the theory on a sample of more than 1,528 of
the United States appellate decisions from 1875-1905. Another example is the
work of Lands and Posner (2001) on Harmless Error in which the researchers
developed an economic model of harmless error and tested the implication of the
model against some rules governing reversible and non-reversible error of
criminal convictions. The researchers collected and analysed data from 963
appellate decisions in which the majority opinion discussed harmless error to
identify the impact of different type of errors on the appellate courts’ decisions.
Finally, there is a work by Lim (2007), on Copyright under Siege: an Economic
Analysis of the Essential Facilities Doctrine and the Compulsory Licensing of
Copyrighted Works. Lim looked into copyrights law and its impact on
competition. In particular, he examined whether compulsory licensing through the
essential facilities doctrine of competition law provides an acceptable solution to
the potential problem of copyright owner harming competition in the software and
database industries by refusing access to copyrighted work.

2. ESSENTIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF NONDOCTRINAL RESEARCH:

1. It tries to find out the impact of non-legal events upon the legal decision.

2. It seeks to identify and appraise the degree of variables influence the outcome and

3. It tries to find out the effect of each decision on people and society as such legal decision
making. The field of empirical research is wider and the availability of authoritative sources
is very less which involve several new techniques which are unknown to the research.

4. This type of research is conducted to assess the impact of non-legal event on legal
provisions or law making process.

5. Variables which influence the legal process play an important role.

6. Consequences of any law or principle of law on the society can be traced.

7. Co-relation between law and other non-legal fact is the outcome of this research.

3. TOOLS OF NON-DOCTRINAL RESEARCH:

1. Meeting.

2. Survey.

3. Schedule.

4. Judgment.

5. Participant or non-participant.

6. Sampling.

7. Case study.

8. Posted or unpublished resources.

4. MERITS OF NON-DOCTRINAL RESEARCH:

1. Non-doctrinal research enhances lawyer’s ability to understand the implications and effects
on the society.

2. Legal researches can use social science methodologies themselves to investigate issues, or
they can collaborate with skilled researchers from other disciplines.

3. It highlights the gap between legislative goals and social reality and thereby depicts a true
picture of law-in-action.

4. It also highlights the gap in relation to the practice of law enforcers, regulators and
adjudicators and use or underuse of the law by intended beneficiaries of the law

5. It highlights the reasons behind making the law ‘symbolic’, less-effective or ineffective.

5. DEMERITS OF NON-DOCTRINAL RESEARCH

1. Financial support is lacking.

2. Other disciplines had shed away from the study of legal order has been shed away

3. Due to their preoccupation with their profession, the contributions of legal

4. Legal researchers lack a tradition that enables them to strengthen the empirical

5. Lack of training in the use of techniques of this empirical research. Most of the steps by
other disciplines academicians are very less research of research such as collection of data,
field work, formation of hypothesis, etc. are unknown to the legal researcher.

6. There is an unfavourable and arrangement attitude towards the empirical research. The use
of qualitative measurement techniques are very difficult to understand by legal researchers.

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN DOCTRINAL AND NON-

DOCTRINAL RESEARCH:
1. Doctrinal research lays much emphasis upon legal principles but non-doctrinal research
lays lesser emphasis upon doctrines.

2. In doctrinal research, researcher uses traditional source for data but non-doctrinal research
is not solely dependent on traditional or conventional sources for data.

3. In doctrinal research scholar seeks to answer one or two legal propositions or questions,
on the other hand non-doctrinal research involves number of questions and large area.

4. Doctrinal research is a theoretical study but non doctrinal research involves empirical
study.

5. Mostly secondary source are used in doctrinal research and primary data are used in non-
doctrinal research.

6. Doctrinal research is concerned with legal propositions; on the other hand non-doctrinal
research is more concerned with social values and people.

CONCLUSION
In conclusion, I can say that it is easy to target a specific methodology and identify its
strengths and weaknesses. However, it must be noted that doctrinal and non-doctrinal legal
research are the ultimate way to find the answers that have been raised in the context of
attempts to understand the emerging issues in the framework of the law. There is no hierarchy
between methodologies and they are all of equal importance for the development and
understanding of the law. What is crucial is that researchers must try and equip themselves
with the necessary skills to enable them to comfortably meet their research objectives.
Undoubtedly, a well-versed scholar will be aware of the advantages and disadvantages of any
particular methodology, and will work to obtain the benefits that result from a better quality
of work. Page 28 of 29 Often, the combination of methodologies, i.e. a mixed method using
ideological, social, and legal, can work together to achieve a better understanding of the law.
Thus, postgraduate scholars would do well to equip themselves by using alternative research
methodologies.