Abstract
Abstract A view of legal rules as fixed entities is erroneous. In legal disputes the debate is often about the rules themselves. Traditional logic‐based approaches to legal expert systems run up against difficulties when dealing with conflicts about the rules themselves. It is worthwhile to adopt a different view on the nature of legal rules. An alternative can be found in dialogical reason‐based logic (RBL). In this logic a dispute is seen as a dialogue between two parties in which reasons for or against some thesis are put forward. In RBL both rules and facts can be the objects of disputes.
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.
