Abstract
Numerous legal scholars have asserted that legal reasoning is largely a deductive process in which legal rules are applied to the facts of a case in order to derive a conclusion. Though some might contest this assertion, it seems that what we know as law is largely a system of rules. However, these rules are not immutable and fully consistent; in many cases, multiple rules can be applied to the facts of a case, the conclusion derived from one rule conflicting with and potentially defeating that derived from another rule. In this paper, we discuss legal reasoning as defeasible reasoning and present a prototype of a computer-based legal reasoning system to illustrate the advantages of our approach. Defeasible reasoning is an appropriate foundation for the development of legal support systems because it not only can support the non-monotonicity of legal rules but also can resolve many of the conflicts that arise in applying these rules.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
