Reasoning with precedents in a dialogue game
Proceedings of the 6th international conference on Artificial intelligence and law
Modeling Legal Arguments: Reasoning with Cases and Hypotheticals
Modeling Legal Arguments: Reasoning with Cases and Hypotheticals
A model of legal reasoning with cases incorporating theories and values
Artificial Intelligence - Special issue on AI and law
Towards a formal account of reasoning about evidence: argumentation schemes and generalisations
Artificial Intelligence and Law - Law, logic and defeasibility
Dialectical argumentation with argumentation schemes: an approach to legal logic
Artificial Intelligence and Law - Law, logic and defeasibility
Arguing on the Toulmin Model: New Essays in Argument Analysis and Evaluation (Argumentation Library)
Arguing on the Toulmin Model: New Essays in Argument Analysis and Evaluation (Argumentation Library)
The Carneades model of argument and burden of proof
Artificial Intelligence
Modular argumentation for modelling legal doctrines in common law of contract
Artificial Intelligence and Law
Facilitating case comparison using value judgments and intermediate legal concepts
Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law
| Hi-index | 0.01 |
The two main types of law are legislation and precedents. Both types have a corresponding reasoning pattern determining legal consequences: legislation can be applied and precedents followed. The separate modelling of these two reasoning patterns using logical techniques has recently seen considerable progress. About the logical links between the two less is known, although progress has already been made. This document focuses on such logical relations. The main question is: to what extent can the application of legislation and precedent adherence be considered as two sides of the same logical coin? Findings from the boundaries of logic and law will serve as a starting point. This text is a translated, adapted and extended version of Verheij 2007.