ARASZKIEWICZ, Michal and Jaromír ŠAVELKA. The Quest for Coherence in Judicial Reasoning. i-lex. Rome, 2012, vol. 7, No 17, p. 173-190. ISSN 1825-1927.
Other formats:   BibTeX LaTeX RIS
Basic information
Original name The Quest for Coherence in Judicial Reasoning
Authors ARASZKIEWICZ, Michal (616 Poland) and Jaromír ŠAVELKA (203 Czech Republic, guarantor, belonging to the institution).
Edition i-lex, Rome, 2012, 1825-1927.
Other information
Original language English
Type of outcome Article in a journal
Field of Study 50500 5.5 Law
Country of publisher Italy
Confidentiality degree is not subject to a state or trade secret
WWW URL
RIV identification code RIV/00216224:14220/12:00062132
Organization unit Faculty of Law
Keywords in English coherence constraint satisfaction judicial reasoning
Tags rivok
Changed by Changed by: Mgr. Petra Georgala, učo 32967. Changed: 5/4/2013 09:17.
Abstract
There are two fundamentally distinct approaches towards modeling of legal reasoning – the top-down and bottom-up approaches. The main difference lies in the method of acquiring the elements which consequently constitute the model. This paper aims to compare the approaches as regards the resulting model represented in the coherence as constraint satisfaction network. At first the top-down approach is applied to the Court of Justice European Union case of Bezpečnostní softwarová asociace – Svaz softwarové ochrany v. Ministerstvo kultury ČR and the resulting model is presented and briefly assessed. The very same case is then modeled using the bottom-up approach. While both models that have been created differ quite significantly they display surprisingly similar features. Both models suggest that the court provides the interpretation of key terms without grounding it in the provisions of authoritative texts. Thus, it either seems to be the case that there is a large portion of implicit reasoning both models fail to express or that the reasoning of the court is actually not grounded in authoritative text.
PrintDisplayed: 22/7/2024 21:46