The Experts below are selected from a list of 327 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Ramakanta Mohanty - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • An expert system approach for Legal Reasoning in acquire immovable property
    2014 First International Conference on Networks & Soft Computing (ICNSC2014), 2014
    Co-Authors: Midde Venkateswarlu Naik, Ramakanta Mohanty
    Abstract:

    In modern system, Legal rules, knowledge and dynamic laws are numerous. Legal Reasoning is more multifaceted in distinguishing fields to make fair and accurate decisions. To normalize Legal Reasoning route appropriately it requires analysis and expertness. Similarly, to automate the complex Legal Reasoning, it is required an expert system. In this paper, we propose an expert system model in the area of acquisition of immovable property such as tangible property (land or house etc...). The contexts to be performed in Legal Reasoning in this domain are (i) to acquire immovable property (ii) to transfer immovable property (iii) to mortgage immovable property (iv)to gifting immovable property. We propose empirical approach with the help of integrating rule based technique along with case based Reasoning and building hybrid system by involving interpreting constitutions, statutes, and regulations in balancing fundamental principles to make ultimate decisions. Our model is an interactive that it allows the end users to answer with respect to questions asked by the interactive Legal expert system as a result system which is helpful to Legal decision advisory system or system for classification of facts or fact finding diagnostic system. Keywords—Expert System, Legal Reasoning, Immovable Property, Legal Rules, Decision Making,VisiRule.

  • An expert system approach for Legal Reasoning in acquire immovable property
    2014 First International Conference on Networks & Soft Computing (ICNSC2014), 2014
    Co-Authors: Midde Venkateswarlu Naik, Ramakanta Mohanty
    Abstract:

    In modern system, Legal rules, knowledge and dynamic laws are numerous. Legal Reasoning is more multifaceted in distinguishing fields to make fair and accurate decisions. To normalize Legal Reasoning route appropriately it requires analysis and expertness. Similarly, to automate the complex Legal Reasoning, it is required an expert system. In this paper, we propose an expert system model in the area of acquisition of immovable property such as tangible property (land or house etc...). The contexts to be performed in Legal Reasoning in this domain are (i) to acquire immovable property (ii) to transfer immovable property (iii) to mortgage immovable property (iv)to gifting immovable property. We propose empirical approach with the help of integrating rule based technique along with case based Reasoning and building hybrid system by involving interpreting constitutions, statutes, and regulations in balancing fundamental principles to make ultimate decisions. Our model is an interactive that it allows the end users to answer with respect to questions asked by the interactive Legal expert system as a result system which is helpful to Legal decision advisory system or system for classification of facts or fact finding diagnostic system.

Leonor Moral Soriano - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • a modest notion of coherence in Legal Reasoning a model for the european court of justice
    Ratio Juris, 2003
    Co-Authors: Leonor Moral Soriano
    Abstract:

    . The aim of this article is to propose a theoretical theme to explain coherence in Legal Reasoning. The main argument that this paper wants to put forward is that theories of coherence in the Legal system should be differentiated from theories of coherence in Legal Reasoning. These focus on arguments, and on how the given arguments are connected. In particular, the notion of coherence in Legal Reasoning proposed here is a modest one. The article applies this theme to the case-law of the European Court of Justice in environmental matters. This provides an example of how to deal with conflicts between incommensurable goods, and how to promote coherence by justifying decisions.

  • Coherence in the Legal Reasoning of the European Court of Justice
    2002
    Co-Authors: Leonor Moral Soriano
    Abstract:

    The aim of this article is twofold. First, it proposes a theoretical theme to explain coherence in Legal Reasoning; second, it applies this theme to the case-law of the European Court of Justice in environmental matters. The paper analyses several decisions of the European Court of Justice on environmental matters, which concern the conflict between two incommensurable goods, namely environmental protection and economic freedoms. Although there is no metric to measure goods such as environment and economic freedoms, choices can be made in a fair and rational way; the question is how can incommensurable goods be evaluated and how can choices be made without their being irrational or arbitrary. Here, a modest notion of coherence is needed to evaluate the Legal Reasoning of the European Court of Justice. The conclusions show that attempts to generate coherence by making all decisions fit into a single line, namely integration, and the criticisms of judicial activism of the Court are based on a poor understanding of coherence in Legal Reasoning, or at worse, the lack of such understanding.

Midde Venkateswarlu Naik - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • An expert system approach for Legal Reasoning in acquire immovable property
    2014 First International Conference on Networks & Soft Computing (ICNSC2014), 2014
    Co-Authors: Midde Venkateswarlu Naik, Ramakanta Mohanty
    Abstract:

    In modern system, Legal rules, knowledge and dynamic laws are numerous. Legal Reasoning is more multifaceted in distinguishing fields to make fair and accurate decisions. To normalize Legal Reasoning route appropriately it requires analysis and expertness. Similarly, to automate the complex Legal Reasoning, it is required an expert system. In this paper, we propose an expert system model in the area of acquisition of immovable property such as tangible property (land or house etc...). The contexts to be performed in Legal Reasoning in this domain are (i) to acquire immovable property (ii) to transfer immovable property (iii) to mortgage immovable property (iv)to gifting immovable property. We propose empirical approach with the help of integrating rule based technique along with case based Reasoning and building hybrid system by involving interpreting constitutions, statutes, and regulations in balancing fundamental principles to make ultimate decisions. Our model is an interactive that it allows the end users to answer with respect to questions asked by the interactive Legal expert system as a result system which is helpful to Legal decision advisory system or system for classification of facts or fact finding diagnostic system. Keywords—Expert System, Legal Reasoning, Immovable Property, Legal Rules, Decision Making,VisiRule.

  • An expert system approach for Legal Reasoning in acquire immovable property
    2014 First International Conference on Networks & Soft Computing (ICNSC2014), 2014
    Co-Authors: Midde Venkateswarlu Naik, Ramakanta Mohanty
    Abstract:

    In modern system, Legal rules, knowledge and dynamic laws are numerous. Legal Reasoning is more multifaceted in distinguishing fields to make fair and accurate decisions. To normalize Legal Reasoning route appropriately it requires analysis and expertness. Similarly, to automate the complex Legal Reasoning, it is required an expert system. In this paper, we propose an expert system model in the area of acquisition of immovable property such as tangible property (land or house etc...). The contexts to be performed in Legal Reasoning in this domain are (i) to acquire immovable property (ii) to transfer immovable property (iii) to mortgage immovable property (iv)to gifting immovable property. We propose empirical approach with the help of integrating rule based technique along with case based Reasoning and building hybrid system by involving interpreting constitutions, statutes, and regulations in balancing fundamental principles to make ultimate decisions. Our model is an interactive that it allows the end users to answer with respect to questions asked by the interactive Legal expert system as a result system which is helpful to Legal decision advisory system or system for classification of facts or fact finding diagnostic system.

Ahmad Rofii - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • WHITHER ISLAMIC Legal Reasoning? The Law and Judicial Reasoning of The Religious Courts
    Journal of Indonesian Islam, 2014
    Co-Authors: Ahmad Rofii
    Abstract:

    The article analyses the judicial Reasoning employed by the religious courts in giving decisions on inheritance, particularly since the promulgation of the 1991 Compilation of Islamic Law. It seeks to examine whether these courts use Islamic Legal Reasoning. This paper argues that the structure of the courts’ decisions is to be found in most Civil Law courts. It then offers three different approaches of Reasoning employed by the religious courts in their decisions on inheritance: the use of the legislations particularly the Compilation as the sole source of deductive Reasoning, the combination of the legislations and the Islamic sources which share the same implication, and the application of Islamic Legal Reasoning with the emphasis on the objectives of Islamic law ( maqāsid al-sharī‘a ) which does not contradict the legislations. Although Islamic Legal Reasoning is employed, in most cases the decisions are simple and straightforward.

Alexander Nikolaevich Shytov - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Theories of Legal Reasoning and Types of Judicial Conscience
    Conscience and Love in Making Judicial Decisions, 2020
    Co-Authors: Alexander Nikolaevich Shytov
    Abstract:

    As we have seen from the previous chapters, conscience is a complex phenomenon. Since conscience is presented as a human mind passing moral judgements, the problem of the variety of these judgements in its relation to Legal Reasoning becomes important for the purpose of the present research. Legal Reasoning means a kind of Reasoning which through finding relevant facts, appropriate Legal rules, and good reasons for the application of these rules to the case, leads to a Legal decision. There are many states of conscience and there are many types of Legal Reasoning. The basic presupposition of this book is that a theory of Legal Reasoning and judicial conscience are closely related to each other. To a certain degree, the variety of theories of Legal Reasoning represents the variety of moral judgements made by the judges.

  • Aquinas’s Theory of Conscience and Legal Reasoning
    Conscience and Love in Making Judicial Decisions, 2020
    Co-Authors: Alexander Nikolaevich Shytov
    Abstract:

    A typical definition of the concept of Legal Reasoning has been given by Neil McCormick. Legal Reasoning for him “is the process of argumentation as a process of justification.”1 Bengoetxea who is influenced by MacCormick insists on the separation of moral and technically Legal argumentation.2 Although Legal argumentation can contain moral argumentation there is still an area of judicial decisions which is free from moral judgements. Therefore, Legal Reasoning does not necessarily involve moral arguments, and consequently, can be carried out without judgements of conscience. But the problem arises of whether, in the course of arriving at a Legal decision, the judge’s resolution to disregard any moral reasons is already a sort of moral judgement?

  • Legal Reasoning in the Theory of Petrazycki
    Conscience and Love in Making Judicial Decisions, 2020
    Co-Authors: Alexander Nikolaevich Shytov
    Abstract:

    The theory of a Russian scholar of Polish descent, Leon Petrazycki, contains interesting ideas, which can help us to clarify the intrinsic connection between Legal Reasoning and the conscience of judges. This connection is left unnoticed in many contemporary writings about judicial decision-making,1 which makes it necessary to consider a theory which paid attention to the relationship between Legal Reasoning and conscience, even though this theory is almost a hundred years old and is not well known in the Western Legal thought.