Staatsexamen key terms

The method of applying a general legal rule to a specific set of facts by checking whether the facts satisfy each element of the norm, producing a conclusion through a structured syllogism.

The abstract set of elements a legal norm requires before its legal consequence applies; facts must match every element for the rule to be triggered.

The exam and judgment style that presents legal reasoning as hypothesis, definition, subsumption, and conclusion, in that order, rather than stating the result first.

A writing style that states the conclusion first and then supplies the supporting reasoning; used in court decisions but rarely in exam answers, which require the examining style.

The legal consequence attached to a norm once its elements are fulfilled, such as a claim, a penalty, or a duty to act.

The right of one person to demand that another do, tolerate, or omit something; exam answers often begin by testing whether such a claim exists.

The specific legal provision that could support a claimed right; identifying it correctly is the first step of most civil-law case solutions.

The constitutional test requiring state action to pursue a legitimate aim, be suitable and necessary, and remain proportionate in the narrow sense.

A fundamental right guaranteed in the constitution that protects individuals against state interference and shapes the application of all ordinary law.

The rule that interference with certain rights requires a statutory basis; it limits executive action and channels restrictions through the legislature.

The discretion granted to an authority to choose among lawful options; its exercise is reviewed for abuse rather than for substantive correctness.

An administrative decision issued by an authority to regulate an individual case in a public-law matter, with effect outside the administration.

The formal objection filed against an administrative decision, initiating an internal review before any court action becomes available.

The patient's voluntary agreement to treatment after receiving adequate information about purpose, risks, alternatives, and consequences; a prerequisite for lawful intervention.

The professional and legal duty to explain a planned measure, its risks, and alternatives in terms the patient can understand before obtaining consent.

Presumed consent inferred from what a reasonable patient would want when the person cannot be asked and delay would endanger them.

The systematic list of possible conditions that could explain a patient's findings, ranked and tested to reach the most likely diagnosis.

The structured history taken from a patient or relatives covering complaints, prior illness, medication, and social factors that guide further assessment.

A leading symptom that narrows the diagnostic search and points toward a particular condition or organ system before confirmatory tests.

The approach that integrates the best available research evidence, clinical expertise, and patient values when making treatment decisions.

A trial in which participants are randomly assigned to intervention or control groups, reducing bias and supporting causal conclusions about effects.

The threshold probability of a false-positive finding that a study accepts in advance, conventionally five percent, against which a p-value is judged.

Systematically developed recommendations that guide practitioners toward appropriate care for defined situations while leaving room for individual judgment.

The duty to exercise the care expected of a competent member of the profession in comparable circumstances, breach of which can trigger liability.

Failure to observe the care objectively required in the circumstances although the breach and its consequences were foreseeable and avoidable.

The duty to record essential findings, measures, and explanations in the patient record so that care is traceable and accountable.

The duty to keep information learned in a professional role confidential, with disclosure permitted only under statutory exceptions or valid consent.

A situation in which delay would threaten life or serious health, justifying immediate action even without prior consent or full documentation.

Cooperation across professional boundaries in which each discipline contributes its expertise to a shared plan, with roles and responsibilities clarified.

Structured exchange of information among different health or education professions using shared terminology and agreed handover formats to reduce error.

A handover structure covering situation, background, assessment, and recommendation, designed to transmit essential information briefly and safely.

The systematic assessment of learner preconditions, progress, and difficulties as a basis for planning instruction and support measures.

Designing instruction around demonstrable skills and dispositions rather than content coverage alone, with outcomes stated in observable terms.

Adapting tasks, materials, and support to differing learner prerequisites so that all participants can work at an appropriate level.

The principle that all learners participate together in mainstream settings, with barriers removed and support provided as needed.

An independent body that reviews research involving humans for ethical acceptability and participant protection before the study may begin.

A framework judging clinical action by beneficence, non-maleficence, respect for autonomy, and justice, used to structure ethical case analysis.