The modular logic of private international law

We provide a logical analysis of private international law, a rather esoteric, but increasingly important, domain of the law. Private international law addresses overlaps and conflicts between legal systems by distributing cases between the authorities of such systems (jurisdiction) and establishing what rules these authorities have to apply to each case (choice of law). A formal model of the resulting interactions between legal systems is proposed based on modular argumentation. It is argued that this model may also be useful for governing the interactions between heterogeneous agents, belonging to different and differently regulated virtual societies, without recourse to a central regulatory agency. The model also provides for multiple interpretations concerning rules of private international law as well as substantive rules of the different legal systems.

[1]  Michael J. Maher,et al.  Argumentation Semantics for Defeasible Logic , 2004, J. Log. Comput..

[2]  Giovanni Sartor,et al.  Fundamental legal concepts: A formal and teleological characterisation* , 2006, Artificial Intelligence and Law.

[3]  Henry Prakken,et al.  Applying Preferences to Dialogue Graphs , 2008, COMMA.

[4]  G. Sartor.  Legal Reasoning: A Cognitive Approach to Law , 2005 .

[5]  Henry Prakken,et al.  The Carneades model of argument and burden of proof , 2007, Artif. Intell..

[6]  Phan Minh Dung,et al.  Dialectic proof procedures for assumption-based, admissible argumentation , 2006, Artif. Intell..

[7]  Simon Atrill,et al.  CHOICE OF LAW IN CONTRACT: THE MISSING PIECES OF THE ARTICLE 4 JIGSAW? , 2004, International and Comparative Law Quarterly.

[8]  Peter Gärdenfors,et al.  Knowledge in Flux , 1988 .

[9]  Henry Prakken,et al.  Argument-Based Extended Logic Programming with Defeasible Priorities , 1997, J. Appl. Non Class. Logics.

[10]  Henry Prakken,et al.  A System for Defeasible Argumentation, with Defeasible Priorities , 1996, Artificial Intelligence Today.

[11]  G. Sartor,et al.  A logical analysis of burdens of proof , 2009 .

[12]  Phan Minh Dung,et al.  A Logical Model of Private International Law , 2010, DEON.

[13]  Henry Prakken,et al.  A dialectical model of assessing conflicting arguments in legal reasoning , 1996, Artificial Intelligence and Law.

[14]  Henry Prakken,et al.  An abstract framework for argumentation with structured arguments , 2010, Argument Comput..

[15]  Carlos E. Alchourrón,et al.  Hierarchies of Regulations and their Logic , 1981 .

[16]  J. Hage.  Reasoning with Rules: An Essay on Legal Reasoning and Its Underlying Logic , 1996 .

[17]  C. E. Alchourrón,et al.  On the logic of theory change: Partial meet contraction and revision functions , 1985 .

[18]  Dan Jerker B. Svantesson,et al.  Private International Law and the Internet , 2007 .

[19]  Phan Minh Dung,et al.  Modular Argumentation For Modelling Legal Doctrines in Common Law of Contract , 2008, JURIX.

[20]  Dov M. Gabbay,et al.  Proceedings of the International Conference on Formal and Applied Practical Reasoning , 1996 .

[21]  Phan Minh Dung,et al.  On the Acceptability of Arguments and its Fundamental Role in Nonmonotonic Reasoning, Logic Programming and n-Person Games , 1995, Artif. Intell..

[22]  Brian Z. Tamanaha,et al.  Understanding Legal Pluralism: Past to Present, Local to Global , 2007 .

[23]  Jonathan M. D. Hill,et al.  Choice Of Law In Contract Under The Rome Convention: The Approach Of The Uk Courts , 2004, International and Comparative Law Quarterly.

[24]  Peter Stone,et al.  EU Private International Law: Harmonization of Laws , 2006 .

[25]  Guido Boella,et al.  Institutions with a hierarchy of authorities in distributed dynamic environments , 2008, Artificial Intelligence and Law.

[26]  Bart Verheij,et al.  Legal Evidence and Proof , 2009 .

[27]  Peter Gärdenfors,et al.  On the logic of theory change: Partial meet contraction and revision functions , 1985, Journal of Symbolic Logic.

[28]  Gerhard Brewka,et al.  Carneades and Abstract Dialectical Frameworks: A Reconstruction , 2010, COMMA.

[29]  Marek J. Sergot,et al.  The British Nationality Act as a logic program , 1986, CACM.