Abstract
The Hohfeldian fundamental legal conceptions that deal with solely deontic LEGAL RELATIONS, the duty/privilege and right/no-right pairs, require not only an adequate definition of agency for the person who is obligated or permitted to act, but also the same of patiency for the person to-or-for whom that action is directed. Person-i’s DUTY to see-to-it-that that state-of-affairs-s is so for the benefit of person-j is defined here in terms of a deontic OBLIGATION operation and DONE-BY (D2) and DONE-FOR (D4) relations between a state of affairs and persons. This paper is a refinement of the author’s earlier efforts to modify, extend, and enrich Hohfeld’s fundamental legal conceptions into a more general notion of LEGAL RELATIONS (defined concepts are expressed in all capital letters.) In particular, the agency concept of DONE-BY is being brought into closer conformity with Belnap’s emerging stit logic, with the modifications of deontic logic accompanying such changes. The S4–D2 action modal logic considered here is intended to be a part of the A-HOHFELD logic in which LEGAL RELATIONS are defined and from which a representation language called the A-HOHFELD language is derived. The A-HOHFELD language is being used as a representation language for constructing MINT (Multiple INTerpretation) interpretation-assistance systems for helping lawyers to detect alternative structural interpretations of sets of legal rules.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Anderson, Alan Ross. Logic, norms, and roles. Ratio 1962; 4:36–49.
Anderson, Alan Ross. The logic of Hohfeldian propositions. U of Pittsburgh L Rev 1971; 33:28–38.
Fitch, Frederic B. A revision of Hohfeld’s theory of legal concepts. Logique et Analyse 1967; 10:269–76.
Jones, Andrew J.I. & Sergot, Marek. On the role of deontic logic in the characterization of normative systems. Proceedings of the First International Workshop on Deontic Logic in Computer Science (DEON’91) 1991; Amsterdam.
Jones, Andrew J.I. & Sergot, Marek. Formal specification of security requirements using the theory of normative positions. Proceedings of Esorics-92 1992; Toulouse.
Kanger, Stig. New foundations for ethical theory. 1957; Stockholm. Reprinted in: Hilpinen R (ed) Deontic logic: introductory and systematic readings. D. Reidel, Dordrecht, Holland, 1970, pp. 36–58.
Kanger, Stig. Law and logic. Theoria 1972; 38:105–32.
Kanger, Stig. On realization of human rights, in action, logic and social theory. Holmstron G & Jones A (ed) Acta Philosophica Fennica 1985; 38:71–78.
Lindahl, Lars. Position and change: a study in law and logic. D. Reidel, Dordrecht-Holland/Boston-U.S.A., 1977.
Makinson, David. On the formal representation of rights relations. J of Philosophical Logic 1986; 15:403–25.
Thomson, Judith J. The realm of rights. Harvard Univrsity Press, Cambridge, Mass., London, England, 1990
Allen, Layman E. Formalizing Hohfeldian analysis to clarify the multiple senses of legal right’: a powerful lens for the electronic age. S Calif L Rev 1974; 48:428–87.
Allen, Layman E. Enriching the deontic fundamental legal conceptions of Hohfeld. To be published in Anniversary anthology in computers and law. Bing J & Torvund O (ed)., TANO-publ., Oslo, 1995.
Allen, Layman E. & Saxon, Charles S. Analysis of the logical structure of legal rules by a modernized and formalized version of Hohfeld’s fundamental legal conceptions. In: Martino A & Natali F (ed) Automated analysis of legal texts: logic, informatics, law, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1986, pp 385–450.
Allen, Layman E. & Saxon, Charles S. A-Hohfeld: a language for robust structural representation of knowledge in the legal domain to build interpretation-assistance expert systems. In: Meyer JJ & Wieringa R (ed) Deontic logic in computer science: normative system specification. John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1993, 205–24.
Allen, Layman E. & Saxon, Charles S. Better language, better thought, better communication: the A-Hohfeld language for legal analysis. Forthcoming in the Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, May 21–24, 1995, University of Maryland, College Park, Md.
Hohfeld, Wesley N. Fundamental legal conceptions as applied in judicial reasoning. Yale L J 1913; 23:16–59. Reprinted with a new forward by Arthur L. Corbin, Yale University Press, New Haven, 1964.
Belnap, Nuel. Declaratives are not enough. Philosophical Studies 1990; 59:1–30.
Belnap, Nuel. Before refraining: concepts for agency. Erkenntnis 1991a; 34:137–69.
Belnap, Nuel. Backwards and forwards in the modal logic of agency. Li Philosophy & Phenomenological Res 1991b; 777–807.
Belnap, Nuel & Perloff, Michael. The way of the agent. Studia Logica 1992; 51:463–84.
Belnap, Nuel & Perloff, Michael. In the realm of agents. Annals of Mathematics & Artificial Intelligence 1993; 9:25–48.
Perloff, Michael. Stit and the language of agency. Synthese 1991; 86:379–408.
Allen, Layman E. & Saxon, Charles S. More IA needed in AI: interpretation assistance for coping with the problem of multiple structural interpretations. Third International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, June 25–28, 1991, St. Catherine’s College, Oxford, England, published In the Proceedings of the Conference by the Association for Computing Machinery (ACM).
Allen, Layman E. & Saxon, Charles S. Controlling inadvertent ambiguity in the logical structure of legal drafting by means of the prescribed definitions of the A-Hohfeld structural language. Theoria 1994; 9:135–172.
Herrestadt, Henning & Krogh, Christen. The right direction. Verso un Sistema Esperto Giuridico Integrale, Firenze, 1993. (To be published in 1994.)
Herrestadt, Henning & Krogh, Christen (1995) Deontic logic relativised to bearers and counterparties. To be published in: Bing J & Torvund O (ed) Anniversary anthology in computers and law. TANO-publ., Oslo, 1995.
Horty, John F. & Belnap, Nuel. The deliberative stit: a study of action, omission, ability, and obligation. Forthcoming in J. of Philosophical Logic, 1993.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1996 British Computer Society
About this paper
Cite this paper
Allen, L.E. (1996). From the Fundamental Legal Conceptions of Hohfeld to Legal Relations: Refining the Enrichment of Solely Deontic Legal Relations. In: Brown, M.A., Carmo, J. (eds) Deontic Logic, Agency and Normative Systems. Workshops in Computing. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-1488-8_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-1488-8_1
Publisher Name: Springer, London
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-76015-3
Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-1488-8
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive