Strategic maneuvering with the argumentative role of legal principles in the case of the ‘Unworthy Spouse’

In my contribution I present an analysis of the strategic maneuvering in the decision of the Dutch Supreme Court in the famous case of the ‘Unworthy Spouse’. An analysis of the strategic maneuvering in this case can clarify which discussion strategy is used by the Dutch Supreme Court in the context of an implicit difference of opinion between the lower court and the Supreme Court about the role of legal principles. To explain how the Supreme Court operates, in my analysis I use the concept of ‘strategic maneuvering’ as developed by van Eemeren (van Eemeren FH, Strategic manoeuvering in argumentative discourse. Extending the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, 2010) and van Eemeren and Houtlosser (Argumentation 20:377-380, 2006; van Eemeren FH, Houtlosser P, Seizing the occasion: parameters for analysing ways of strategic manoeuvring. In: van Eemeren FH, Blair JA, Willard Ch.A, Garssen B (ed) Proceedings of the sixth conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation. SicSat, Amsterdam, pp 375-381, 2007), which forms part of the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation described in the contribution by Harm Kloosterhuis in this volume.