Identification of Case Content with Quantitative Network Analysis: An Example from the ECtHR

What is a case decided by the European Court of Human Rights about? The Courts own case database, HUDOC , lists all the articles mentioned in a specific case in their metadata. They also supply a number of keywords, but these keywords for the most part are reduced to repeating phrases from the relevant articles. In order to enhance information retrieval about case content, without relying on manual labor and subjective judgement, we propose in this paper a quantitative method that gives a better indication of case content in terms of which articles a given case is more closely associated with. To do so, we rely on the network structure induced by existing case-to-case and case-to-article citations and propose two computational approaches (referred to as MainIn and MainOut) which result in assigning one representative article to each case. We validate the approach by selecting a sample of important cases and comparing manual investigation of real content of those cases with the MainIn and MainOut articles. Results show that MainIn in particular is able to infer correctly the real content in most of the cases.

[1]  Radboud Winkels,et al.  Determining Authority of Dutch Case Law , 2011, JURIX.

[2]  Marc van Opijnen,et al.  A model for automated rating of case law , 2013, ICAIL.

[3]  Romain Boulet,et al.  A network approach to the French system of legal codes—part I: analysis of a dense network , 2011, Artificial Intelligence and Law.

[4]  Henrik Palmer Olsen,et al.  Netværksanalyse som bidrag til juridisk (forsknings)metode , 2016 .

[5]  Seth J. Chandler,et al.  The Network Structure of Supreme Court Jurisprudence , 2007 .

[6]  Thomas A. Smith The Web of Law , 2005 .

[7]  Tommaso Agnoloni,et al.  The Case Law of Italian Constitutional Court between Network Theory and Philosophy of Information , 2016 .

[8]  Yannis Panagis,et al.  Selecting the cases that defined Europe: Complementary metrics for a network analysis , 2016, 2016 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining (ASONAM).

[9]  Michael O'Boyle,et al.  Law of the European Convention on Human Rights , 2014 .

[10]  Fabien Tarissan,et al.  Analysing the first case of the International Criminal Court from a network-science perspective , 2016, J. Complex Networks.

[11]  Ioannis Anagnostopoulos,et al.  Network Analysis in the Legal Domain: A complex model for European Union legal sources , 2015, J. Complex Networks.

[12]  Pierre Mazzega,et al.  Codification, Law Article and Graphs , 2007, JURIX.

[13]  James H. Fowler,et al.  Abstract Available online at www.sciencedirect.com Social Networks 30 (2008) 16–30 The authority of Supreme Court precedent , 2022 .