Cited By
View all- Dymitruk MMarkovich RLiepiźA RGhosh MDoesburg RGovernatori GVerheij B(2018)Research in progressArtificial Intelligence and Law10.1007/s10506-018-9220-626:1(49-97)Online publication date: 1-Mar-2018
Incorporation of complex doctrinal theories in a model of statutory interpretation: an example of adequate causal link
Pages 161 - 165
Abstract
This paper shows how a complex legal doctrinal theory (the doctrine of causation in law) may be represented in a semi-formal, two-layered model of statutory interpretation. The content of the theory is clarified by the proposed knowledge representation. It is argued that doctrinal theories in the reading proposed here are a source of intermediate legal concepts and, in consequence, of rules that enable the judge to argue efficiently in complex cases without entering into wider considerations involving case-based reasoning structures.
References
[1]
Araszkiewicz, M. 2013. Towards Systematic Research on Statutory Interpretation in AI and Law. In K. Ashley (Ed.): Legal Knowledge and Information Systems - JURIX 2013: The Twenty-Sixth Annual Conference. IOS Press, Amsterdam, 15--24.
[2]
Araszkiewicz, M. 2014. Scientia Juris: A Missing Link in the Modelling of Statutory Reasoning. In R. Hoekstra (Ed.): Legal Knowledge and Information Systems - JURIX 2014: The Twenty-Seventh Annual Conference. IOS Press, Amsterdam, 1--10.
[3]
Bex, F. 2014. Towards an integrated theory of causal scenarios and evidential arguments. In S. Parsons, N. Oren, C. Reed, F. Cerutti (Eds.) Computational Models of Argument - Proceedings of COMMA 2014. IOS Press, Amsterdam, 133--140.
[4]
Grabmair, M. and Ashley, K. 2011. Facilitating case comparison using value judgments and intermediate legal concepts. In K. Ashley, T. van Engers (Eds.): The 13th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, Proceedings of the Conference. ACM, New York, 161--170.
[5]
Hart, H. L. A. and Honoré, T. 1985. Causation in the Law. 2nd ed. Clarendon, Oxford.
[6]
Hoekstra, R. and Breuker, J. 2007. Commonsense Causal Explanation in a Legal Domain. Artificial Intelligence and Law 3, 281--299.
[7]
Kaliński, M. 2014. Związek przyczynowy. Szkoda. /Causal Link. Damage./ In A. Olejniczak (Ed.) System Prawa Prywatnego /The System of Private Law/. Legalis: C. H. Beck.
[8]
Lehmann J., Breauker J. and Brouwer, B. 2004. Causation in AI and Law. Artificial Intelligence and Law 12, 279--315.
[9]
Lehmann, J. and Gangemi, A. 2007. An ontology of physical causation as a basis for assessing causation in fact and attributing legal responsibility. Artificial Intelligence and Law 15, 301--321.
[10]
Lindahl, L. and Odelstadt, J. 2014. A Theory of Joining-Systems. In D. Gabbay, J. Horty, X. Parent, R. van der Meyden, L. van der Torre (Eds.) Handbook of Deontic Logic and Normative Systems. College Publications, London, 545--634.
[11]
Pearl, J. 2000. Causality. Models, Reasoning and Inference. Cambridge UP, Cambridge.
[12]
Prakken, H. and Renooij S. 2001. Reconstructing causal reasoning about evidence: a case study. In B. Verheij, A. R. Lodder, R. P. Loui, A. Muntjewerff (eds.), Legal Knowledge and Information Systems. JURIX 2001: The Fourteenth Annual Conference. IOS Press, Amsterdam, 131--142.
[13]
Sartor, G. 2009. Legal concepts as inferential nodes and ontological categories. Artificial Intelligence and Law 17, 217--251.
[14]
Walker, V., Park C., Hwang P., John A., Krasnov E. and Langlais K. 2013. A process approach to inferences of causation: empirical research from vaccine cases in the USA. Journal of Law, Probability and Risk 12, 189--205.
[15]
Zurek, T. 2013. Causality and Other Aspects of Instrumental Reasoning. In W. Abramowicz (Ed.): Business Information Systems Workshops - BIS 2013 International Workshops. Springer, 184--195.
Index Terms
- Incorporation of complex doctrinal theories in a model of statutory interpretation: an example of adequate causal link
Recommendations
An argumentation framework for contested cases of statutory interpretation
This paper proposes an argumentation-based procedure for legal interpretation, by reinterpreting the traditional canons of textual interpretation in terms of argumentation schemes, which are then classified, formalized, and represented through argument ...
Ethical responsibilities and legal liabilities of network security professionals
ACSAC '97: Proceedings of the 13th Annual Computer Security Applications ConferenceProfits, losses and the attendant risks of tort litigation run to the extreme in times of great speculation in an unregulated economic environment-conditions which characterize the present enormous growth in computer networking. Public law enforcement ...
How to justify a backing’s eligibility for a warrant: the justification of a legal interpretation in a hard case
AbstractThe Toulmin model has been proved useful in law and argumentation theory. This model describes the basic process in justifying a claim, which comprises six elements, i.e., claim (C), data (D), warrant (W), backing (B), qualifier (Q), and rebuttal (...
Comments
Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
June 2015
246 pages
Copyright © 2015 Owner/Author.
Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.
Sponsors
- Center for IP Law & Markets: Center for Intellectual Property Law & Markets, University of San Diego School of Law
- TrademarkNow: TrademarkNow
- The International Association for Artificial Intelligence and Law
- Davis Polk: Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP
- Legal Robot: Legal Robot
- Thomson Reuters: Thomson Reuters Corporation
In-Cooperation
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States
Publication History
Published: 08 June 2015
Check for updates
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Extended-abstract
Conference
ICAIL '15
Sponsor:
- Center for IP Law & Markets
- TrademarkNow
- Davis Polk
- Legal Robot
- Thomson Reuters
ICAIL '15: 15th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law
June 8 - 12, 2015
California, San Diego
Acceptance Rates
ICAIL '15 Paper Acceptance Rate 30 of 58 submissions, 52%;
Overall Acceptance Rate 69 of 169 submissions, 41%
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- View Citations1Total Citations
- 110Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)2
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 01 Mar 2025
Other Metrics
Citations
Cited By
View all- Dymitruk MMarkovich RLiepiźA RGhosh MDoesburg RGovernatori GVerheij B(2018)Research in progressArtificial Intelligence and Law10.1007/s10506-018-9220-626:1(49-97)Online publication date: 1-Mar-2018
View Options
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign in