Artificial Intelligence and Law 4 (3-4):199-273 (1996)
This paper describes a model of legal reasoning and a logic for reasoning with rules, principles and goals that is especially suited to this model of legal reasoning. The paper consists of three parts. The first part describes a model of legal reasoning based on a two-layered view of the law. The first layer consists of principles and goals that express fundamental ideas of a legal system. The second layer contains legal rules which in a sense summarise the outcome of the interaction of the principles and goals for a number of case types. Both principles, goals and rules can be used in legal arguments, but their logical roles are different. One characteristic of the model of legal reasoning described in the first part of the paper is that it takes these logical differences into account. Another characteristic is that it pays serious attention to the phenomena of reasoning about the validity and acceptance of rules, respectively principles and goals, and about the application of legal rules, and the implications of these arguments for the use of rules, principles and goals in deriving legal conclusions for concrete cases.The second part of the paper first describes a logic (Reason-Based Logic) that is especially suited to deal with legal arguments as described in terms of the previously discussed model. The facilities of the logic are illustrated by means of examples that correspond to the several aspects of the model.
|Keywords||legal reasoning reasoning with principles and rules non-monotonic logic|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
Citations of this work BETA
A Hybrid Formal Theory of Arguments, Stories and Criminal Evidence.Floris J. Bex, Peter J. van Koppen, Henry Prakken & Bart Verheij - 2010 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 18 (2):123-152.
Using Argument Schemes for Hypothetical Reasoning in Law.Trevor Bench-Capon & Henry Prakken - 2010 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 18 (2):153-174.
Solving a Murder Case by Asking Critical Questions: An Approach to Fact-Finding in Terms of Argumentation and Story Schemes. [REVIEW]Floris Bex & Bart Verheij - 2012 - Argumentation 26 (3):325-353.
Deontic Logics for Prioritized Imperatives.Jörg Hansen - 2006 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 14 (1-2):1-34.
Similar books and articles
Jumps and Logic in the Law.Aleksander Peczenik - 1996 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 4 (3-4):297-329.
Comparing Alternatives in the Law.Jaap Hage - 2004 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 12 (3):181-225.
A Dialectical Model of Assessing Conflicting Arguments in Legal Reasoning.H. Prakken & G. Sartor - 1996 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 4 (3-4):331-368.
Hard Cases: A Procedural Approach. [REVIEW]Jaap C. Hage, Ronald Leenes & Arno R. Lodder - 1993 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 2 (2):113-167.
Normative Conflicts in Legal Reasoning.Giovanni Sartor - 1992 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 1 (2-3):209-235.
On Universal Relevance in Legal Reasoning.Barbara Baum Levenbook - 1984 - Law and Philosophy 3 (1):1 - 23.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads52 ( #99,251 of 2,158,126 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #198,258 of 2,158,126 )
How can I increase my downloads?