Abstract

Judges decide lawsuits connecting a fact or an event of real life to a norm which foresees that type of fact or event in abstract terms. Against this traditional teaching many scholars of civil law think that courts judge today are applying principles, rather than norms: general principles of law or constitutional principles. Therefore they speak of a crisis of facts. The opinion of the author is that the new scheme cannot be applied to administrative law. Administrative powers are subject to the rule of law or principle of legality. Therefore they may be exercised only if a statute confers them to administrative authority, establishing conditions, limits, times and safeguards for the citizen. Direct and exclusive application of principles is not allowed when a dispute occurs between a public administration and a citizen. A decision founded exclusively on principles implies that judges have a power no more subject to legislation. This is why the author doubts that law suits governed by civil law know a crisis of facts.