Legal Interpretations in LegalRuleML

Legislative documents are by their own nature subject to interpretation, and interpretations of one document can diverge. In this paper we discuss the mechanism proposed by LegalRuleML to capture alternative interpretations or renderings of a legal source. LegalRuleML allows for mutually incompatible renderings (or interpretations) of a legal source to coexist in the same LegalRuleML document, and provides facilities to identify the interpretations and to select them. The mechanism is illustrated with an example form Italian Jurisprudence.

[1]  Shalom Lappin,et al.  当代语义理论指南 = The Handbook of Contemporary Semantic Theory , 2015 .

[2]  Rinke Hoekstra,et al.  Developing Content for LKIF: Ontologies and Frameworks for Legal Reasoning , 2006, JURIX.

[3]  Guido Governatori,et al.  Rules and Norms: Requirements for Rule Interchange Languages in the Legal Domain , 2009, RuleML.

[4]  S. Griffis.  EDITOR , 1997, Journal of Navigation.

[5]  Brian Davis,et al.  On Controlled Natural Languages: Properties and Prospects , 2009, CNL.

[6]  Simonetta Montemagni,et al.  Semantic Processing of Legal Texts: Where the Language of Law Meets the Law of Language , 2010, Semantic Processing of Legal Texts.

[7]  L. Solan,et al.  The Oxford handbook of language and law , 2012 .

[8]  Pompeu Casanovas,et al.  Law and the Semantic Web: Legal Ontologies, Methodologies, Legal Information Retrieval, and Applications , 2005, Law and the Semantic Web.

[9]  Guido Governatori.  Un Modello Formale Per Il Ragionamento Giuridico , 1997 .

[10]  Benjamin N. Grosof.  Representing e-commerce rules via situated courteous logic programs in RuleML , 2004, Electron. Commer. Res. Appl..

[11]  Rinke Hoekstra,et al.  LKIF Core: Principled Ontology Development for the Legal Domain , 2009, Law, Ontologies and the Semantic Web.

[12]  Thomas F. Gordon,et al.  Constructing Legal Arguments with Rules in the Legal Knowledge Interchange Format (LKIF) , 2008, Computable Models of the Law, Languages, Dialogues, Games, Ontologies.

[13]  F. D. Saussure.  Cours de linguistique générale , 1924 .

[14]  Lawrence M. Solan,et al.  Linguistic Issues in Statutory Interpretation , 2011 .

[15]  Christopher D. Manning,et al.  Generating Typed Dependency Parses from Phrase Structure Parses , 2006, LREC.

[16]  Bryan A. Garner,et al.  Reading Law: The Interpretation of Legal Texts , 2012 .

[17]  Ralf Poscher.  Ambiguity and Vagueness in Legal Interpretation , 2010 .

[18]  Guido Governatori,et al.  Norm Compliance in Business Process Modeling , 2010, RuleML.

[19]  Fabio Vitali,et al.  MetaLex XML and the Legal Knowledge Interchange Format , 2008, Computable Models of the Law, Languages, Dialogues, Games, Ontologies.

[20]  Guido Governatori,et al.  OASIS LegalRuleML , 2013, ICAIL.

[21]  Bart Verheij,et al.  Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law , 2013, ICAIL 2013.

[22]  Johan Bos,et al.  Linguistically Motivated Large-Scale NLP with C&C and Boxer , 2007, ACL.

[23]  Brian H Bix,et al.  Legal Interpretation And The Philosophy Of Language , 2012 .

[24]  Guido Governatori,et al.  LegalRuleML: XML-Based Rules and Norms , 2011, RuleML America.