Here we are concerned with rationality in law, specifically in decisions made by judges. The decision is rational if it is explained; it is explained if the arguments (reasons) the decision is grounded on are noted. There are two forms of legal arguments: obligatory arguments, that is, legal rules, and additional arguments, that is argument a contrario, a. a fortiory, a. a simili ad simille etc. However, what if in his judicial decision judge didn't note leglal rules on which he grounded his decision? This question is posed because a research of croatian judicial decisions shows that a great number of croatian courts - in all degres - do not note legal rules on which their decisions are grounded. Therefore, higher courts neither note legal rules nor they sanction if cuorts in first degree do not note their decisions. Thus, do we consider these decisions to be rational?
