In this paper we attempt to give an account of reasoning with legal cases contextualised within a general theory of persuasion in practical reasoning. We begin by presenting our general theory, concentrating on the variety of ways in which a particular position can be attacked. We then apply our theory to the legal domain, illustrating our approach by a case study based on the well known CATO system. From this we conclude that it is possible to see reasoning with legal cases as a particular instantiation of our general theory. We identify some points of interest for discussion, and conclude by stating our intended directions for future work.
%0 Conference Paper
%1 Greenwood03Towards
%A Greenwood, K.
%A Capon, T. Bench
%A Mcburney, P.
%B The Ninth International Conference AI and Law (ICAIL-2003).
%D 2003
%K computer, law, legal, persuasion, phd-bibtex-import
%T Towards a computational account of persuasion in law
%X In this paper we attempt to give an account of reasoning with legal cases contextualised within a general theory of persuasion in practical reasoning. We begin by presenting our general theory, concentrating on the variety of ways in which a particular position can be attacked. We then apply our theory to the legal domain, illustrating our approach by a case study based on the well known CATO system. From this we conclude that it is possible to see reasoning with legal cases as a particular instantiation of our general theory. We identify some points of interest for discussion, and conclude by stating our intended directions for future work.
@inproceedings{Greenwood03Towards,
abstract = {{In this paper we attempt to give an account of reasoning with legal cases contextualised within a general theory of persuasion in practical reasoning. We begin by presenting our general theory, concentrating on the variety of ways in which a particular position can be attacked. We then apply our theory to the legal domain, illustrating our approach by a case study based on the well known CATO system. From this we conclude that it is possible to see reasoning with legal cases as a particular instantiation of our general theory. We identify some points of interest for discussion, and conclude by stating our intended directions for future work.}},
added-at = {2010-12-17T18:47:41.000+0100},
author = {Greenwood, K. and Capon, T. Bench and Mcburney, P.},
biburl = {https://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2d4b3d7032c305bb48f2556beb8ec1e3a/mortimer_m8},
booktitle = {The Ninth International Conference AI and Law (ICAIL-2003).},
citeseerurl = {http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/576656.html},
citeulike-article-id = {113892},
comment = {(private-note)quite interesting: formal representation of argumentation.},
interhash = {46363eda3ffd43ea0dd456ab966e67b5},
intrahash = {d4b3d7032c305bb48f2556beb8ec1e3a},
keywords = {computer, law, legal, persuasion, phd-bibtex-import},
posted-at = {2005-03-04 12:43:49},
priority = {0},
timestamp = {2010-12-20T11:11:25.000+0100},
title = {{Towards a computational account of persuasion in law}},
year = 2003
}