1 / 37

The Story of the Lawyer and the Machine

The Story of the Lawyer and the Machine. Tom van Engers. Legal engineering. G. Term : This means that and has relations with those. e-Court. CLIME. Sources. Formal Models. Applications. doctrine. legis prudence. case law. legislation. p1,p2,…. q1,q2,…. O( α І β ). concepts.

fisk
Download Presentation

The Story of the Lawyer and the Machine

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Story of the Lawyer and the Machine Tom van Engers

  2. Legal engineering G Term: This means that and has relations with those e-Court CLIME Sources Formal Models Applications doctrine legis prudence case law legislation p1,p2,… q1,q2,… O(αІβ) concepts norms tasks and reasoning meta-knowledge FOLaw LLD LKIF … LRI-core

  3. The Lawyer and the Machine?

  4. The Lawyer and the Machine?

  5. The Lawyer and the Machine?

  6. Legal engineering • Legal reasoning as a rational process • Based upon mathematical principles "Once the characteristic numbers of most notions are determined, the human race will have a new kind of tool, a tool that will increase the power of the mind much more than optical lenses helped our eyes, a tool that will be as far superior to microscopes or telescopes as reason is to vision."Leibniz, Philosophical Essays

  7. Legal engineering perspectives • Document management • Search and retrieval • Case management • Deductive reasoning • Thus far many useful applications have been implemented • Argumentation Support • Need for a realistic model of legal reasoning • Requires (besides legal knowledge) common sense knowledge, empathy, sense for social issues… and creativity

  8. How can we support the judicial

  9. Some figures (September 2005) • 2005; 20% more cases (4x the # in 1980) • Huge growth of business related cases (+ 27% compared to 2003), e.g. electricity, telecom, health insurance. • 2006; 1 : 10 cases > 1 year • 2008; 1 : 4 cases > 1 year • Working pressure problems especially in lower courts: • mass processes • loss of quality, deterioration of feeling that justice is done

  10. Case management

  11. Cases

  12. MetaLex • www.MetaLex.eu • CEN standard for legal sources • Based upon open standards (e.g. W3C) • International cooperation • Local Chapters • Juriconnect • Norme in Rete • Akoma Ntoso • ….

  13. Open standards and open solutions are a requirement • Create a free market, in which all vendors can participate • Avoid vendor lock-in

  14. Example: MetaVex Editor; Screenshot Document Structure Project/ Document overview Insertable elements / templates Main editing area XML metadata (attributes)

  15. Seal - MetaVex • Open infrastructure • Open standards • No vendor lock in ! • Improved legal quality • Technical quality • Better accessible • More support • All levels of government • Adaptable to local differences

  16. Argumentation structures in legal dossiers

  17. Argumentation support Wigmore 1931

  18. Toulmin 1958

  19. Bart Verheij 2004

  20. Reed, Prakken and Walton

  21. Usual research focus • “Making sense of evidence” (Wigmore) has clear advantages such as: • Better insights in relationships between proof and hypotheses • Better insights in previously decided legal cases • Basis for legal theoretical research: what is the structure of the legal arguments and proof

  22. Argument structures & strategy

  23. Letter of the lawyers to the employer

  24. From our research we conclude that • Visualisation of argument structures provides a good insight in the evolvement of cases. • Claims, supporting and counter arguments can be clearly distinguished. • Characteristic for legal argumentation: • Argument schemata • (Legal) Source types • Strategies • ASS that visualise argumentation structures could become useful as supporting device for lawyers

  25. Artificial Intelligence

  26. Is this the lawyers nightmare?

  27. ICT for the judicial • Document management • Search and retrieval • Case management • Deductive reasoning • Thus far many useful applications have been implemented • Argumentation Support • Need for a realistic model of legal reasoning • Requires (besides legal knowledge) common sense knowledge, empathy, sense for social issues… and creativity

  28. Concluding remarks It’s not just the technology that matters Implementation should also include: • Organisational change • Process redesign • Education of the stakeholders involved Advise: use recognizable scenarios and try to work from there

  29. Challenges for the future OWL

  30. Example from LKIF core ontology

  31. LKIF core (www.Estrella-project.eu) • 15 modules • Basic • Mereology, place, time, spacetime, top • Core • Process, action, expression, role • Legal • Norm, legal-role, legal-action • Vocabulary • Modification, rules

  32. Invitation • Join the CEN/Metalex community • Collaborate with us to extend the LKIF core ontology

  33. Questions? vanEngers@uva.nl www.LeibnizCenter.org

More Related