Bound versus free judicial decision

Aim of the contribution is to show some aspects of the judicial decision making dilemma, including pointing out the necessity of fixed decisions and a purpose of legally-positivistic approaches and their uses. The goal is to draw on certain positives of fixed approach, but at the same time also stress its downsides, representing a relict of legal positivism. Healthy formalism is a carrier of legal reliance and prescience of the decision making processes; it brings, above all, anticipated decisions. This principle cannot do without connection to a free interpretation. Optimal quality of decision making is accompanied, or more precisely, is necessarily continued by a “golden” middle course between both of the extreme approaches: fixed and free interpretation and applications stemming out of it. It is desirable to search and find contact points and virtues of both fixed and free applications and their balanced use in a significant area of a judicial decision making.