Abstract
This tutorial presents the principles of the OASIS LegalRuleML applied to the legal domain and discusses why, how, and when LegalRuleML is well-suited for modelling norms. To provide a framework of reference, we present a comprehensive list of requirements for devising rule interchange languages that capture the peculiarities of legal rule modelling in support of legal reasoning. The tutorial comprises syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic foundations, a LegalRuleML primer, as well as use case examples from the legal domain.
G. Governatori—NICTA is funded by the Australian Government through the Department of Communications and the Australian Research Council through the ICT Centre of Excellence Program.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
- 2.
- 3.
- 4.
LegalRuleML defines a Legal Statement as an expression of a Legal Rule or a part of a Legal Rule where a Legal Rule is a formal representation of a Legal Norm.
- 5.
Reference [14] identify more types of norms/rules. However, most of them can be reduced to the two types described here insofar as the distinction is not on structure of the rules but it depends on the meaning of the content (specific effect) of the rules, while keeping the same logical format.
- 6.
Deontic Specification is the class that includes the various deontic notions used in LegalRuleML.
- 7.
Akoma Ntoso is an XML vocabulary for representing legal, legislative, parliamentary and judiciary documents in a structured and semantic manner. Akoma Ntoso is managed by the LegalDocML TC of OASIS. https://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=legaldocml.
- 8.
Certain qualified attributes in external namespaces are imported into LegalRuleML.
- 9.
- 10.
The full LegalRuleML representation of section 504 is available from https://tools.oasis-open.org/version-control/browse/wsvn/legalruleml/trunk/examples/tutorial/USC_17_504_context.lrml.
- 11.
L’indennità di cui al comma 1 viene corrisposta in misura pari all’80 per cento di cinque dodicesimi del reddito percepito e denunciato ai fini fiscali dalla libera professionista nel secondo anno precedente a quello della domanda.
- 12.
Nell’applicare la legge non si può ad essa attribuire altro senso che quello fatto palese dal significato proprio delle parole secondo la connessione di esse, e dalla intenzione del legislatore.
- 13.
Alternatively, we could use \(earned(x,y-3)\Rightarrow \left[ \mathsf {OBL}_{ bearer=employer }^{ auxiliary=freelancer }\right] \textit{paybenefit}(f(x))\), while, from a formal point of view, it is semantically equivalent to (6) it is less close in meaning to the textual provision than its counterpart: the temporal reference in the argument would “third year preceding the year of the application”.
- 14.
In this paper, we focus on Prescriptive and Constitutive Statements, which always lead to generated Legal Rules. However, in the general case, e.g. \(\mathtt{<lrml:FactualStatement> }\), something other than a Legal Rule may be generated when a Statement is in scope.
- 15.
The full example is available from https://tools.oasis-open.org/version-control/browse/wsvn/legalruleml/trunk/examples/approved/maternity_alternatives_compact.lrml.
References
Adida, B., Birbeck, M., McCarron, S., Herman, I.: RDFa core 1.1 - third edition. http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-core/#s_curies
Alchourrón, C.E., Bulygin, E.: Permission and permissive norms. In: Krawietz, W., et al. (eds.) Theorie der Normen, pp. 349–371. Duncker & Humblot, Berlin (1984)
Antoniou, G.: Defeasible logic with dynamic priorities. Int. J. Intell. Syst. 19(5), 463–472 (2004)
Antoniou, G., Billington, D., Governatori, G., Maher, M.J.: Representation results for defeasible logic. ACM Trans. Comput. Logic 2(2), 255–287 (2001)
Athan, T., Boley, H., Governatori, G., Palmirani, M., Paschke, A., Wyner, A.: OASIS LegalRuleML. In: Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, pp. 3–12, New York (2013)
Athan, T., Governatori, G., Palmirani, M., Paschke, A., Wyner, A.: Legal interpretations in LegalRuleML. In: Villata, S., Peroni, S., Palmirani, M. (eds.) Proceedings of the Semantic Web for the Law and Second Jurix Doctoral Consortium Workshops (SW4LAW+JURIX-DC 2014). CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 1296, CEUR-WS.org (2014)
Bench-Capon, T., Coenen, F.P.: Isomorphism and legal knowledge based systems. Artif. Intell. Law 1(1), 65–86 (1992)
Brickley, D., Guha, R.V.: RDF schema 1.1. http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-schema/
Dattolo, A., Di Iorio, A., Duca, S., Feliziani, A.A., Vitali, F.: Structural patterns for descriptive documents. In: Baresi, L., Fraternali, P., Houben, G.-J. (eds.) ICWE 2007. LNCS, vol. 4607, pp. 421–426. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)
de Saussure, F.: Cours de Linguistique Générale. Payot, Lausanne (1916)
Dworkin, R.: The model of rules I. In Taking Rights Seriously. Harvard University Presss, Cambridge, MA (1977)
Gordon, T., Prakken, H., Walton, D.: The Carneades model of argument and burden of proof. Artif. Intell. 171, 875–896 (2007)
Gordon, T.F.: The Pleadings Game-An Artificial Intelligence Model of Procedural Justice. Springer, New York (1995)
Gordon, T.F., Governatori, G., Rotolo, A.: Rules and norms: Requirements for rule interchange languages in the legal domain. In: Governatori, G., Hall, J., Paschke, A. (eds.) RuleML 2009. LNCS, vol. 5858, pp. 282–296. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
Governatori, G.: Un modello formale per il ragionamento giuridico. Ph.D. thesis, CIRFID, Università di Bologna (1997)
Governatori, G.: Representing business contracts in RuleML. Int. J. Coop. Inf. Syst. 14(2–3), 181–216 (2005)
Governatori, G.: On the relationship between Carneades and defeasible logic. In: van Engers, T. (ed.) Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law (ICAIL 2011), pp. 31–40. ACM Press (2011)
Governatori, G.: Business process compliance: An abstract normative framework. IT Inf. Technol. 55(6), 231–238 (2013)
Governatori, G., Olivieri, F., Rotolo, A., Scannapieco, S.: Computing strong and weak permissions in defeasible logic. J. Philos. Logic 42(6), 799–829 (2013)
Governatori, G., Rotolo, A.: Logic of violations: A Gentzen system for reasoning with contrary-to-duty obligations. Australas. J. Logic 4, 193–215 (2006)
Governatori, G., Rotolo, A.: Changing legal systems: legal abrogations and annulments in defeasible logic. Logic J. IGPL 18(1), 157–194 (2010)
Governatori, G., Rotolo, A., Sartor, G.: Temporalised normative positions in defeasible logic. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law (ICAIL 2005), pp. 25–34. ACM (2005)
Hart, H.: The Concept of Law, 2nd edn. Clarendon Press, Oxford (1994)
Herrestad, H., Krogh, C.: Obligations directed from bearers to counterparts. In: Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law (ICAIL 1995), pp. 210–218 (1995)
Lam, H.-P., Governatori, G.: The making of SPINdle. In: Governatori, G., Hall, J., Paschke, A. (eds.) RuleML 2009. LNCS, vol. 5858, pp. 315–322. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
Lappin, S. (ed.): The Handbook of Contemporary Semantic Theory. Blackwell Publishers, Cambridge (1997)
Nute, D.: Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming, volume 3, chapter Defeasible Logic, pp. 353–395. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1994
Palmirani, M., Cervone, L., Bujor, O., Chiappetta, M.: RAWE: an editor for rule markup of legal texts. In: Fodor, P., Roman, D., Anicic, D., Wyner, D., Palmirani, M., Sottara, D., Lévy, F. (eds.) Joint Proceedings of the 7th International Rule Challenge, the Special Track on Human Language Technology and the 3rd RuleML Doctoral Consortium. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, Seattle, USA, 11–13 July 2013, vol. 1004, CEUR-WS.org (2013)
Palmirani, M., Governatori, G., Contissa, G.: Temporal dimensions in rules modelling. In: Winkels, R. (ed.) JURIX. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, vol. 223, pp. 159–162. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2010)
Palmirani, M., Governatori, G., Rotolo, A., Tabet, S., Boley, H., Paschke, A.: LegalRuleML: XML-based rules and norms. In: Palmirani, M. (ed.) RuleML - America 2011. LNCS, vol. 7018, pp. 298–312. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)
Prakken, H., Sartor, G.: A dialectical model of assessing conflicting argument in legal reasoning. Artif. Intell. Law 4(3–4), 331–368 (1996)
Prakken, H., Sartor, G.: Argument-based extended logic programming with defeasible priorities. J. Appl. Non Class. Logics 7(1), 25–75 (1997)
Raz, J.: Between authority and interpretation: on the theory of law and practical reason. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2009)
Sartor, G.: Legal reasoning: A cognitive approach to the law. In: Pattaro, E., Rottleuthner, H., Shiner, R.A., Peczenik, A., Sartor, G. (eds.) A Treatise of Legal Philosophy and General Jurisprudence, vol. 5. Springer, Berlin (2005)
Scalia, A., Garner, B.A.: Reading Law: The Interpretation of Legal Texts. West, Minneapolis (2012)
Searle, J.R.: The Construction of Social Reality. The Free Press, New York (1996)
Nicos Stavropoulos. Legal interpretivism. In Edward N. Zalta, editor, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Summer 2014 edition (2014)
Georg Henrik von Wright: Norm and action: A logical inquiry. Routledge and Kegan Paul, London (1963)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Athan, T., Governatori, G., Palmirani, M., Paschke, A., Wyner, A. (2015). LegalRuleML: Design Principles and Foundations. In: Faber, W., Paschke, A. (eds) Reasoning Web. Web Logic Rules. Reasoning Web 2015. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 9203. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21768-0_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21768-0_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-21767-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-21768-0
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)