Hard cases: A procedural approach [Book Review]

Artificial Intelligence and Law 2 (2):113-167 (1993)
Much work on legal knowledge systems treats legal reasoning as arguments that lead from a description of the law and the facts of a case, to the legal conclusion for the case. The reasoning steps of the inference engine parallel the logical steps by means of which the legal conclusion is derived from the factual and legal premises. In short, the relation between the input and the output of a legal inference engine is a logical one. The truth of the conclusion only depends on the premises, and is independent of the argument that leads to the conclusion.This paper opposes the logical approach, and defends a procedural approach to legal reasoning. Legal conclusions are not true or false independent of the reasoning process that ended in these conclusions. In critical cases this reasoning process consists of an adversarial procedure in which several parties are involved. The course of the argument determines whether the conclusion is true or false. The phenomenon of hard cases is used to demonstrate this essential procedural nature of legal reasoning.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/BF00871759
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
Download options
PhilPapers Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 16,658
External links
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

View all 21 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Jaap Hage (1996). A Theory of Legal Reasoning and a Logic to Match. Artificial Intelligence and Law 4 (3-4):199-273.
Henry Prakken (2008). A Formal Model of Adjudication Dialogues. Artificial Intelligence and Law 16 (3):305-328.

View all 11 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Monthly downloads

Added to index


Total downloads

24 ( #124,740 of 1,725,999 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

6 ( #118,705 of 1,725,999 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature

Start a new thread
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.