The European Taxonomy Syllabus: A multi-lingual, multi-level ontology framework to untangle the web of European legal terminology

The final publication is available at IOS Press through http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/AO-170174. This paper describes a new concept of legal ontology together with an ontology development tool, called European Legal Taxonomy Syllabus (ELTS). The tool is used to model the legal terminology created by the Uniform Terminology project on EU consumer protection law as an ontology. ELTS is not a formal ontology in the standard sense, i.e., an axiomatic ontology formalized, for instance, in description logic. Rather, it is a lightweight ontology, i.e. a knowledge base storing low-level legal concepts, connected via low-level semantic relations, and related to linguistic patterns that denote legal concepts in several languages spoken in the European Union (EU). In other words, ELTS is a multi-lingual and multi-jurisdictional terminological vocabulary enriched with concepts denoted by vocabulary entries, with semantic relations between different concepts. The choice of such an architecture is based on past studies in comparative law and is motivated by the need to reveal the differences between national systems within the EU. Past literature in comparative law highlights that axiomatic ontologies freeze legal knowledge in an unreal steadiness, i.e., they render it disconnected from legal practice. Much more flexibility is needed to make the knowledge base acceptable to legal practitioners. ELTS was developed together with legal practitioners on the basis of the comparative view of European law. The ontology framework is designed to help professionals study the meaning of national and European legal terms and how they inter-relate in the transposition of European Directives into national laws. The structure and user interface of ELTS is suitable for building multi-lingual, multi-jurisdictional legal ontologies in a bottom-up and collaborative manner, starting from the description of legal terms by legal experts. It also takes into account the interpretation of norms, the dynamic character of norms and the contextual character of legal concepts in that they are linked to their legal sources (legislation, case law and doctrine).

[1]  Heiner Stuckenschmidt,et al.  Constructing a legal core ontology: LRI-Core , 2004 .

[2]  Leon van der Torre,et al.  Input/Output Logics , 2000, J. Philos. Log..

[3]  S. Laurence,et al.  Concepts: Core Readings , 1999 .

[4]  Martin Hepp,et al.  Possible Ontologies: How Reality Constrains the Development of Relevant Ontologies , 2007, IEEE Internet Computing.

[5]  Enrico Francesconi,et al.  A Linguistic-ontological Support for Multilingual Legislative Drafting: the DALOS Project , 2007, LOAIT.

[6]  Hans Kelsen,et al.  The Pure Theory of Law and Analytical Jurisprudence , 1941 .

[7]  Gary Peller,et al.  The Metaphysics of American Law , 1985 .

[8]  Piek Vossen,et al.  EuroWordNet: A multilingual database with lexical semantic networks , 1998, Springer Netherlands.

[9]  David L. Davidson,et al.  The Logical Form of Action Sentences , 2001 .

[10]  Livio Robaldo,et al.  Learning from syntax generalizations for automatic semantic annotation , 2014, Journal of Intelligent Information Systems.

[11]  Aldo Gangemi,et al.  A Constructive Framework for Legal Ontologies , 2003, Law and the Semantic Web.

[12]  Pompeu Casanovas,et al.  Approaches to Legal Ontologies: Theories, Domains, Methodologies , 2013 .

[13]  Philipp Cimiano,et al.  Linking Lexical Resources and Ontologies on the Semantic Web with Lemon , 2011, ESWC.

[14]  Livio Robaldo,et al.  Eunomos, a legal document and knowledge management system for the Web to provide relevant, reliable and up-to-date information on the law , 2016, Artificial Intelligence and Law.

[15]  Pompeu Casanovas,et al.  Approaches to Legal Ontologies , 2011, Law, Governance and Technology Series.

[16]  Livio Robaldo,et al.  Independent Set Readings and Generalized Quantifiers , 2010, J. Philos. Log..

[17]  Livio Robaldo,et al.  Interpretation and inference with maximal referential terms , 2010, J. Comput. Syst. Sci..

[18]  Livio Robaldo,et al.  Combining Input/Output Logic and Reification for Representing Real-World Obligations , 2015, JSAI-isAI Workshops.

[19]  H. L. A. Hart,et al.  Positivism and the Separation of Law and Morals , 1958 .

[20]  Rinke Hoekstra,et al.  The LKIF Core Ontology of Basic Legal Concepts , 2007, LOAIT.

[21]  Livio Robaldo,et al.  Distributivity, Collectivity, and Cumulativity in Terms of (In)dependence and Maximality , 2011, J. Log. Lang. Inf..

[22]  Sylvie Szulman,et al.  Merging of legal micro-ontologies from European directives , 2007, Artificial Intelligence and Law.

[23]  A. Valente,et al.  Legal Knowledge Engineering - A Modelling Approach , 1995 .

[24]  Barbara Pozzo,et al.  HARMONISATION OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW AND THE NEED OF CREATING A COMMON TERMINOLOGY , 2003 .

[25]  Edwina L. Rissland,et al.  CABARET: Rule Interpretation in a Hybrid Architecture , 1991, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..

[26]  R. V. Kralingen.  Frame-Based Conceptual Models Of Statute Law , 1995 .

[27]  Tommaso Caselli,et al.  Rule-Based Creation of TimeML Documents from Dependency Trees , 2011, AI*IA.

[28]  Philipp Cimiano,et al.  A Multilingual Semantic Network as Linked Data: lemon-BabelNet , 2014 .

[29]  Tom M. van Engers,et al.  Ontologies in the Legal Domain , 2008, Digital Government.

[30]  Pompeu Casanovas,et al.  OPJK and DILIGENT: ontology modeling in a distributed environment , 2007, Artificial Intelligence and Law.

[31]  Nicola Guarino,et al.  Sweetening Ontologies with DOLCE , 2002, EKAW.

[32]  Guido Boella,et al.  Eunomos, a Legal Document and Knowledge Management System to Build Legal Services , 2011, AICOL.

[33]  J. Breuker,et al.  Ontologies, the missing link between legal theory and AI and Law , 1994 .

[34]  E. Francesconi.  The “Norme in Rete” Project: Standards and Tools for Italian Legislation , 2006 .

[35]  Peter M. Tiersma,et al.  Some Myths About Legal Language , 2006 .

[36]  Doris Liebwald,et al.  Law’s Capacity for Vagueness , 2013 .

[37]  Edgar A. Whitley,et al.  The Construction of Social Reality , 1999 .

[38]  Núria Bel,et al.  PAROLE/SIMPLE 'lemon' ontology and lexicons , 2015, Semantic Web.

[39]  George A. Miller,et al.  WordNet: A Lexical Database for English , 1995, HLT.

[40]  Peter Birks,et al.  Themes in comparative law : in honour of Bernard Rudden , 2002 .

[41]  Livio Robaldo,et al.  Semantic Relation Extraction from Legislative Text Using Generalized Syntactic Dependencies and Support Vector Machines , 2013, RuleML.

[42]  Michael Uschold,et al.  Ontologies: principles, methods and applications , 1996, The Knowledge Engineering Review.

[43]  Rodolfo Sacco.  Un point de vue italien , 1987 .

[44]  Pierre Jouvelot,et al.  Legivoc – connecting laws in a changing world , 2013 .

[45]  Antonietta Alonge,et al.  ItalWordNet: a Large Semantic Database for Italian , 2000, LREC.

[46]  Livio Robaldo,et al.  A system for classifying multi-label text into EuroVoc , 2013, ICAIL.

[47]  Burkhard Schafer.  Inheritance Principles and the Community of Heirs , 1998 .

[48]  R. Sprugnoli,et al.  Modelization of Domain Concepts Extracted from the Italian Privacy Legislation , 2006 .

[49]  Tommaso Caselli,et al.  From Italian Text to TimeML Document via Dependency Parsing , 2011, CICLing.

[50]  Livio Robaldo,et al.  Linking legal open data: breaking the accessibility and language barrier in european legislation and case law , 2015, ICAIL.

[51]  Timothy A.O. Endicott.  The Value of Vagueness , 2008 .

[52]  Nicola Guarino,et al.  Evaluating ontological decisions with OntoClean , 2002, CACM.

[53]  Simonetta Montemagni,et al.  NLP-based metadata extraction for legal text consolidation , 2009, ICAIL.

[54]  John D. Rawls.  Two Concepts of Rules , 1955 .

[55]  Guido Boella,et al.  Roles, an interdisciplinary perspective , 2007, Appl. Ontology.

[56]  Qiao Zhang,et al.  Fuzziness - vagueness - generality - ambiguity , 1998 .

[57]  Monica Palmirani,et al.  Time Model for Managing the Dynamic of Normative System , 2006, EGOV.

[58]  Balakrishnan Chandrasekaran,et al.  The Ontology of Tasks and Methods , 1997 .

[59]  Thomas R. Gruber,et al.  A translation approach to portable ontology specifications , 1993, Knowl. Acquis..

[60]  Paul Buitelaar,et al.  Ontology and the Lexicon: Ontology-based semantic lexicons: mapping between terms and object descriptions , 2010 .

[61]  Steven L. Winter.  Transcendental Nonsense, Metaphoric Reasoning, and the Cognitive Stakes for Law , 1989 .

[62]  Gerda Falkner,et al.  Non-Compliance with EU Directives in the Member States: Opposition through the Backdoor? , 2004 .

[63]  Asunción Gómez-Pérez,et al.  Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management: Ontologies and the Semantic Web , 2002, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[64]  Daniela Tiscornia,et al.  The Lois Project: Lexical Ontologies for Legal Information Sharing , 2007 .

[65]  R. Sacco,et al.  Legal Formants: A Dynamic Approach To Comparative Law , 1991 .

[66]  Stefano Borgo,et al.  Foundational Choices in DOLCE , 2009, Handbook on Ontologies.