Abstract
This paper deals with two issues in the field of reasoning by analogy in the law. The one issue is whether there exists such a thing as analogous rule application, or whether there is only the ‘normal’ application of a broadened rule. It is argued that if rules, as the entities made by a legislator, are distinguished from generalised solutions for cases, the idea of analogous application of rules makes sense. It is also shown how the so-called ‘reason-based model of rule application’, in contrast to the traditional modus ponens or subsumption model, makes it easy to give a logical account of analogous rule application. The other issue is how to argue logically about whether two cases are sufficiently similar to adopt the outcome of the one case for the other case. Section 3 provides a general logical model to establish this. The model is based on the comparison of the reasons for and against a particular solution in the two cases.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
K. D. Ashley (1991) ArticleTitle‘Reasoning with cases and hypotheticals in HYPO’ International Journal of Man-Machine Studies 34 753–796 Occurrence Handle10.1016/0020-7373(91)90011-U
L. K. Branting (1991) ‘Reasoning with Portions of Precedents’. Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law ACM New York 145–154
J. C. Hage (2001a) ‘Formalizing Legal Coherence’, Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law ACM New York 22–31
J. C. Hage (2001b) ‘Legal Logic. It’s Existence, Nature and Use’ A. Soeteman (Eds) Pluralism and Law Kluwer Dordrecht 347–374
J. C. Hage (2003) ArticleTitle‘Legal Reasoning and Legal Integration’ Maastricht Journal of Eoropean and Comparative Law 10, nr. 1 67–97
J. C. Hage (2005) Studies in Legal Logic Springer Dordrecht
Kloosterhuis, H.: 2002, ‘Van overeenkomstige toepassing. De pragma-dialectische reconstructie van analogie-argumentatie’ in rechterlijke uitspraken, Ph-D thesis, Amsterdam.
U. Klug (1982) Juristische Logik EditionNumber4 Springer Verlag Berlin e.a
H. Prakken (1997) Logical Tools for Modelling Legal Argument. A Study of Defeasible Reasoning in Law Kluwer Dordrecht
H. Prakken G. Sartor (1998) ArticleTitle‘Modelling Reasoning with Precedents in a Formal Dialogue Game’ Artificial Intelligence and Law 6, nos. 2–4 231–287 Occurrence Handle10.1023/A:1008278309945
Roth, B.: 2003, ‘Case-based reasoning in the law. A formal theory of reasoning by case comparison’. PhD-thesis, Maastricht.
A. Soeteman (1989) Logic in Law. Remarks on Logic and Rationality in Normative Reasoning, Especially in Law Kluwer Dordrecht
I Tammelo (1969) Outlines of Modern Legal Logic Franz Steiner Wiesbaden
H. B. Verheij J. C. Hage (1994) Reasoning by Analogy; A Formal Reconstruction H. Prakken A. J. Muntjewerff A. Soeteman (Eds) Legal Knowledge Based Systems; The Relation With Legal Theory Koninklijke Vermande Lelystad 65–78
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hage, J. The Logic of Analogy in the Law. Argumentation 19, 401–415 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-005-0506-y
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-005-0506-y