构建法律判例推理框架，解决冲突判例导致的判决不一致问题。
When Precedents Clash
- 结合法院层级与时间维度，建立判例约束关系模型。
- 形式化定义推翻判例和误判案例，明确其非约束性。
- 在冲突判例下实现新案件的清晰决策，适用于普通法体系。
判例一致性是避免检索到相互冲突的约束性先例的关键。然而在法律实践中，判例库的一致性要求往往难以满足。如(Broughton 2019)所指出，判例约束模型应考虑特定法律体系的层级结构及案件的时间维度。本文延续(Liu et al. 2022; Di Florio et al. 2023)的研究，将布尔分类器与法律案例推理关联起来。在此基础上，我们为分类器模型引入组织结构，综合考虑法院层级以及哪些法院的判决对后续案件具有约束力。研究聚焦于普通法体系，并引入案件间的时序关系。在此增强框架中，可形式化定义被推翻的判例（overruled cases）和因疏忽作出的判例（decided per incuriam），这些判例不应作为后续案件的约束依据。最后，我们证明了在何种条件下，基于层级结构与时间维度的原则能够为存在冲突约束性判例的新案件提供无歧义的决策过程。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
Consistency of case bases is a way to avoid the problem of retrieving conflicting constraining precedents for new cases to be decided. However, in legal practice the consistency requirements for case bases may not be satisfied. As pointed out in (Broughton 2019), a model of precedential constraint should take into account the hierarchical structure of the specific legal system under consideration and the temporal dimension of cases. This article continues the research initiated in (Liu et al. 2022; Di Florio et al. 2023), which established a connection between Boolean classifiers and legal case-based reasoning. On this basis, we enrich the classifier models with an organisational structure that takes into account both the hierarchy of courts and which courts issue decisions that are binding/constraining on subsequent cases. We focus on common law systems. We also introduce a temporal relation between cases. Within this enriched framework, we can formalise the notions of overruled cases and cases decided per incuriam: such cases are not to be considered binding on later cases. Finally, we show under which condition principles based on the hierarchical structure and on the temporal dimension can provide an unambiguous decision-making process for new cases in the presence of conflicting binding precedents.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品；中文卡片由大模型生成，请以原文为准。