Logic Journal of the IGPL 18 (1):157-194 (2010)
AbstractIn this paper we investigate how to represent and reason about legal abrogations and annulments in Defeasible Logic. We examine some options that embed in this setting, and in similar rule-based systems, ideas from belief and base revision. In both cases, our conclusion is negative, which suggests to adopt a different logical model. This model expresses temporal aspects of legal rules, and distinguishes between two main timelines, one internal to a given temporal version of the legal system, and another relative to how the legal system evolves over time. Accordingly, we propose a temporal extension of Defeasible Logic suitable to express this model and to capture abrogation and annulment. We show that the proposed framework overcomes the difficulties discussed in regard to belief and base revision, and is sufficiently flexible to represent many of the subtleties characterizing legal abrogations and annulments
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
References found in this work
On the Logic of Theory Change: Partial Meet Contraction and Revision Functions.Carlos E. Alchourrón, Peter Gärdenfors & David Makinson - 1985 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 50 (2):510-530.
Knowledge in Flux. Modeling the Dynamics of Epistemic States.Peter Gärdenfors - 1988 - Studia Logica 49 (3):421-424.
Towards a General Theory of Action and Time.James F. Allen - 1984 - Artificial Intelligence 23 (2):123-154.
Citations of this work
AGM 25 Years: Twenty-Five Years of Research in Belief Change.Eduardo Fermé & Sven Ove Hansson - 2011 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 40 (2):295 - 331.
AGM 25 Years: Twenty-Five Years of Research in Belief Change.Eduardo Fermé & Sven Ove Hansson - 2011 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 40 (2):295-331.
Artificial Intelligence as Law: Presidential Address to the Seventeenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law. [REVIEW]Bart Verheij - 2020 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 28 (2):181-206.
NO Revision and NO Contraction.Gregory Wheeler & Marco Alberti - 2011 - Minds and Machines 21 (3):411-430.
Similar books and articles
A Theory of Legal Reasoning and a Logic to Match.Jaap Hage - 1996 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 4 (3-4):199-273.
On Relationships Between the Logic of Law, Legal Positivism and Semiotics of Law.Vadim Verenich - 2011 - Sign Systems Studies 39 (2/4):145-195.
The Logic of Time in Law and Legal Expert Systems.Daniel Poulin Ejan Mackaay - 1990 - Ratio Juris 3 (2):254-271.
Reasoning with Rules: An Essay on Legal Reasoning and its Underlying Logic.Jaap Hage - 1996 - Kluwer Academic Publishers.
From a Rule-Based Conception to Dynamic Patterns. Analyzing the Self-Organization of Legal Systems.Daniéle Bourcier & Gérard Clergue - 1999 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 7 (2-3):211-225.
AI and the Conquest of Complexity in Law.L. Wolfgang Bibel - 2004 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 12 (3):159-180.
Law and Defeasibility. A Few Comments on The Logic of Legal Requirements.Bartosz Brożek - 2014 - Revus 23:165-170.
The Modular Logic of Private International Law.Phan Minh Dung & Giovanni Sartor - 2011 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 19 (2-3):233-261.
Promulgation and Derogation of Legal Rules.Pablo E. Navarro - 1993 - Law and Philosophy 12 (4):385 - 394.
A Computational Framework for Institutional Agency.Guido Governatori & Antonino Rotolo - 2008 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 16 (1):25-52.
Model for Knowledge and Legal Expert Systems.Anja Oskamp - 1992 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 1 (4):245-274.
Scientia Iuris - an Unsolved Philosophical Problem.Aleksander Peczenik - 2000 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 3 (3):273-302.
The Role of Semantics in Legal Expert Systems and Legal Reasoning.Ronald K. Stamper - 1991 - Ratio Juris 4 (2):219-244.