What are some domains of law, where linguistic interpretations can be very vague and multi-interpretable?
By this I mean domains, where it's not very easy to understand what has happened, what's right/wrong etc. Due to the "description" of it being e.g. very subject-dependent.
An example that I've e.g. thought:
A rape is interpretable, if there's physical objective evidence for it.
However, as some have adjusted the legal concept of rape to be distinguishable based on e.g. "whether the subject has or has not accepted the sexual intercourse", then this may become more vague, because people can change their opinion. So a person may e.g. draw an accusation of rape by changing the opinion about, whether the action was voluntary or not. And there's potentially no subject-dependent evidence for clarifying, whether it's a rape or not. If it depends on "whether a subject says it's voluntary or not", since there may not be an objective way to reveal "voluntarity".
But also, is multi-interpretability a real concern?