In this poster I suggest that folksonomies could be fruitfully used in legal information management as a collective process of “codification” carried out by the users of legal documents available on line. In this sense, through the “lattice” topology of collective tagging systems could arise a synthesis between “openness” and “knowledge”, legal information retrieval and legal artificial reasoning.

In modern legal systems, the litigated issues are numerous, the reasoning is complex, and the decision-making processes are highly regulated. Moreover, the decision-making integrates legal rules and policies with expert and non-expert evidence. What is needed is a means of representing, studying, and partially automating such complex legal reasoning. This paper presents a visual framework for m...

This paper analyzes the concept of rights from a logical point of view. We start on two types of legal sentences: legal object sentences and legal meta-sentences. A legal object sentence describes an obligation of its addressee and a legal meta-sentence describes the validity of a legal sentence. We consider a legal sentence one that describes someone’s right as a legal meta-sentence. We clarif...

Neil MacCormick has deeply influenced contemporary legal theory. The importance of his studies on practical reasoning in general and on legal reasoning and legal argumentation in particular, on legal institutionalism, on sovereignty, on the theory of rights and on the rule of law can hardly be exaggerated. It must be added that his researches on these different themes do not proceed along paral...

In this paper we consider legal reasoning as a species of practical reasoning. As such it is important both that arguments are considered in the context of competing, attacking and supporting arguments, and that the possibility of rational disagreement is accommodated. We present two formal frameworks for considering systems of arguments: the standard framework of Dung, and an extension which r...

In argumentation system, it is important to reason about winning strategy during argument according to the context of their counterpart arguments and their own past arguments. In legal reasoning, it is more complicated than the ordinary argumentation system, since it involves a notion of a burden of proof. In this paper, we extend our framework to reason about the next move given context of arg...

This paper studies the use of hypothetical and value-based reasoning in US Supreme-Court cases concerning the United States Fourth Amendment. Drawing upon formal AI & Law models of legal argument a semi-formal reconstruction is given of parts of the Carney case, which has been studied previously in AI & law research on case-based reasoning. The result is compared with Rissland’s (1989) analysis...