The Quest for Coherence in Judicial Reasoning

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00216224%3A14220%2F12%3A00062132" target="_blank" >RIV/00216224:14220/12:00062132 - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

—

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

—

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

The Quest for Coherence in Judicial Reasoning

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

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 softwarovéochrany 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 surprisinglysimilar features. Both models suggest that the court provides the interpretation of key terms without grounding it in the provisions of authoritative texts.

Název v anglickém jazyce

The Quest for Coherence in Judicial Reasoning

Popis výsledku anglicky

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 softwarovéochrany 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 surprisinglysimilar features. Both models suggest that the court provides the interpretation of key terms without grounding it in the provisions of authoritative texts.

Druh

J_x - Nezařazeno - Článek v odborném periodiku (Jimp, Jsc a Jost)

CEP obor

AG - Právní vědy

OECD FORD obor

—

Projekt

—

Návaznosti

N - Vyzkumna aktivita podporovana z neverejnych zdroju

Rok uplatnění

2012

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

i-lex

ISSN

1825-1927

e-ISSN

—

Svazek periodika

7

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

17

Stát vydavatele periodika

IT - Italská republika

Počet stran výsledku

18

Strana od-do

173-190

Kód UT WoS článku

—

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

—