Argument of COMPREHENSIVENESS
A completudine
The evolution of society can manifest itself by the emergence of legal cases that do not find clear solutions in the existing legal system, be it in national, international or human rights legislation (Tarello 1972, cited in Perelman 1977, p. 55).
Nevertheless, the judge has an obligation to judge, i.e., he or she has to give a verdict upon all the cases before him or her, S.. Silence. That is, he or she cannot refuse to decide a case by arguing that there is no law applicable to that case, or that no interpretation of an existing law can settle it.
In other words, the principle of completeness presupposes that the existing legal body of law, properly interpreted, can qualify each and every human action as permitted, tolerated, or prohibited.
Meta-principles such as the following supplement the legal system:
In civil matters, in the absence of specific law, the judge is bound to proceed according to equity. In order to decide according to equity, he must refer to natural law and to reason, or to received usages, when the primitive law is silent.
Fortuné Anthoine de Saint Joseph, [Concordance between the Foreign Civil Code and the Napoleonic Code], 1856.[1]
The argument of comprehensiveness [2] is parallel to the topos of the impotent legislator, the nature of things that makes the application of the law impossible, see Weight of Circumstances.
[1] Fortuné Anthoine de Saint Joseph, Concordance entre les codes civils étrangers et le Code Napoléon, 2nd ed. t. II. Paris: Cotillon, 1856. P. 460.
[2] Argument a completudine; Lat. completudo, “completeness”.