1. LegalRuleML
ICAIL Tutorial

2. Tara Athan, Athan Services
LegalRuleML TC
Adam Wyner
Uni. Liverpool
Monica Palmirani,
CIRSFID, UniBO
Secretary
Chair
Guido Governatori,
NICTA, Australia
Adrian Paschke,
Uni. Berlin
Secretary
Chair
Tara Athan, Athan Services
Harold Boley, NRC

3. Where to find material of the tutorial
Examples SVN:
Documentation of the LegalRuleML TC:

4. Outline Introduction to LegalRuleML
Goals, Principles, Objectives,
Bridging from RuleML to LegalRuleML
LegalRuleML Metamodel
Use Case #1: "Complaint"  defeasiblity
Use Case #2: "Infringement of Copyright“ Temporal management
Use Case #3: “Section 29 Consumer Code of Australia“ deontic

5. Introduction
LegalRuleML TC

6. Why: Needs
Legal texts are the source of norms, guidelines and rules that often feed into different concrete Web applications.
Legislative documents typically provide general norms and specific procedural rules for eGovernment and eCommerce environments
Contracts specify the conditions of services and business rules
Judgements provide information about arguments and interpretation of norms that establish concrete case-law
Guidelines (Soft Law) provide business and process rules in different sector
eGovernment, eJustice, eLegislation, eLaw
eHealth
Banks, assurances, credit card organizations
Cloud Computing
eCommerce

7. Goal
The goal of the LegalRuleML is to extend RuleML ( with features specific to the formalisation of norms, guidelines, and legal reasoning.
Didactical standard oriented for legal person in order to support the legal knowledge engineers
Managing in flexible and extensible way important concepts of the legal domain in order to assign semantics to domain-specific LegalRuleML elements and attributes
Compact the syntax into a “shortcut” annotation for legal domain which is more effective, descriptive, human-readable for users with legal background

8. OASIS: background Not-for-profit consortium founded in 1993
Open to all: companies, government agencies, academic and research institutions, individuals
International community
5,000+ participants including: 600+ organizations in 100+ countries
33% in Europe 13% in Asia
Technical agenda set by members
Board and Committee chairs elected by member
About of 65 TC now active in several domains including cloud computing, security and privacy, government and legal, smart grid, SOA and more

9. OASIS and LegalXML LegalXML.org Community – 1998.
Legal, court, business, academic, and technology professionals.
Collaboration on non-proprietary standards for the legal community.
OASIS LegalXML Member Section – March 2002.
LegalRuleML started in Jan 2012
LegalDocML started in March 2012 9 9

10. Why OASIS? Stable and robust governance of the standard
International standard body certification
All TC Members have equal participation rights
All work (docs, s, wiki, etc.) are publicly accessible
Non-members contribute via comment lists
Lightweight process focused on getting work done
IPR Policy consistently receives high marks
OASIS Standards can be submitted to de jure bodies (ISO, ITU, etc) for further ratification

11. LegalRuleML Principles (1/2)
Multiple Semantic Annotations: A legal rule may have multiple semantic annotations where each annotation can represent a different legal interpretation. Each such annotation can appear in a separate annotation block as internal or external metadata. There is a range of parameters that can be set to provide the interpretation, e.g. provenance, applicable jurisdiction, logical interpretation of the rule, and others. Context of the rule should be recorded in an atomic and encapsulated block in order to realize the isomorphism principle.
Tracking the LegalRuleML Creators: As part of the provenance information, a LegalRuleML document or any of its fragments can be associated with its creators.
Linking Rules and Provisions (isomorphism): LegalRuleML includes a mechanism, based on IRI, that allows N:M relationships among the rules and the textual provisions:
avoiding redundancy in the IRI definition and errors in the associations
LegalRuleML is independent respect any Legal Document XML standard, IRI naming convantion

12. LegalRuleML Principles (2/2)
Temporal Management: Provisions, references, rules, applications of rules and physical entities change in time, and their histories interact in complicated ways. LegalRuleML must represent these temporal issues in unambiguous fashion. In particular a rule has a range of parameters which can vary over time such as its status (e.g. strict, defeasible, defeater), its validity (e.g. repealed, annulled, suspended) and its jurisdiction (e.g. only in EU, only in US). In addition, a rule has a spectrum of temporal aspects such as internal constituency of the action, the time of assertion of the rule, the efficacy, enforcement, and so on.
Formal Ontology Reference: LegalRuleML is independent from any legal ontology and logic framework. It includes a mechanism, based on IRIs, for pointing to reusable classes of a specified external ontology.
LegalRuleML is based on RuleML: LegalRuleML reuses and extends concepts and syntax of RuleML wherever possible, and also adds novel annotations. RuleML includes also Reaction RuleML.
Mapping: Investigate the mapping of LegalRuleML metadata to RDF triples for favouring Linked Data reuse.

13. LegalRuleML Objective
Extend RuleML Standard for managing in integrated way four main axes:
Legal Sources
Legal Rules including deontic and defeasible
Legal Temporal dimensions
Legal Rule Context (e.g. jurisdiction, sovereignty, qualifications, authors, etc.)
This permits:
To express the temporal parameters of the rules and their attributes/properties in atomic way (encapsulation)
To fill the gap between legal text and normative rule interpretation
capture the changes over time of the rules when the legal binding text changes
To open the door for an effective legal reasoning approach combining defeasibility/behaviours and temporal dimensions

14. Scenario
detect the rules and the ontology classes affected by the changes
refer to the proper version of the text and of the ontology classes
take in consideration the evolution of the rules over time with also theirs metadata fixed in a given time tx
Sources, Rules (including deontic and defeasible properties) and context metatadata are “valid” in a given temporal interval.
Legal
Text
@V1
Legal
Text
@V2
Legal
Text
@V3
isomorphism
Legal
Ontology
Concepts
@V2
Legal
Ontology
Concepts
@V3
Legal
Ontology
Concepts
@V1
Legal t2
Legal
original
Legal t1
Metadata-t0
Metadata-t1
Metadata-t2

15. OASIS TC Workflow Working Draft Committee Specification Draft
FIRST STEP
Committee
Specification Draft
Full Majority Vote
Public Review
Open for 30 days
Specification
Special Majority Vote.
SECOND
STEP
Statements of Use
Three use cases
Candidate standard
Public Review
Open for 60 days
THIRD
STEP
Balloting
15% of the OASIS
OASIS Stand.
FORTH
STEP

16. Bridging from RuleML to LegalRuleML
LegalRuleML TC

17. RuleML Family of Sublanguages
LegalRuleML 17

18. Extending RuleML to LegalRuleML
Deliberation RuleML
 "A citizen gets a benefit of 20 percent on the renovation of their house if the citizen does not represent a company and the renovation will improve insulation by at least 10 percent ."   
Reaction RuleML
 "A citizen gets a benefit of 20 percent to be paid in the first month of the renovation of their house, starting on July 1st, 2005 and ending on June 30st, 2015, if the citizen does not represent a company and the renovation will improve insulation by at least 10 percent ."
LegalRuleML
 "Eco Union Private Home Renovation Law: According to this law, which is applicable in all member states of the Eco Union, an Eco Union citizen gets a benefit of 20 percent to be paid in the first month of the renovation of their house, starting on July 1st, 2005 and ending on June 30st, 2015 if the citizen does not represent a company and the renovation will improve insulation by at least 10 percent ." 18

19. Resuse and Integration
the new classes
for the properties
the RuleML classes
for DC classes
for the xsd data type

20. LegalRuleML Metamodel
LegalRuleML TC

21. Legal Rule A legal rule could be: a Constitutive rule
“An “anonymous work” is a work on the copies or phonorecords of which no natural person is identified as author.”
a Prescritpive rule
In a case where the making of the copies or phonorecords would have constituted an infringement of copyright if this title had been applicable, their importation is prohibited.
We distinguish between:
a Logic Formula
a Defesible rule
© DeonticRuleClass

22. Isomorphism between text and rules
metadata
<lrml:Rule key="rule1a-v2">
<lrml:if> ...</lrml:if>
…. <lrml:then>... </lrml:then>
</lrml:Rule>...
Digital Millennium Copyright Act
Taken inspiration from legal text
and modelled using interpretation theory
metadata
<lrml:Rule key="rule2a-v2">
<lrml:if> ...</lrml:if>
…. <lrml:then>... </lrml:then>
</lrml:Rule>...
Produced Rule
metadata
<lrml:Rule key="rule3a-v2">
<lrml:if> ...</lrml:if>
…. <lrml:then>... </lrml:then>
</lrml:Rule>...

23. Normal and Compact version
Meta-model is built on the RDF principles
Node and Edges defines the relationships among <subject, predicate, object>
<lrml:hasStatement>
<lrml:ConstitutiveStatement key="cs1">
<lrml:hasTemplate>
<ruleml:Rule key=":ruletemplate1" closure="universal">
NORMAL
<lrml:ConstitutiveStatement key="cs1">
<ruleml:Rule key=":ruletemplate1" closure="universal">
COMPACT

24. Metamodel: Legal Statements and References
Sources are legal statements (often natural language)
Legal source with IRIs may be referenced directly
Non-IRI-based identifier systems are associated with a same-document IRI reference using the Reference construct

25. References to the Legal Sources
<lrml:References refType="
<lrml:Reference refersTo="ref1" refIDSystemName="AkomaNtoso "/>
<lrml:Reference refersTo="ref2" refID="ECLI:country:court:year:number" refIDSystemName="European Case Law Identifier" refIDSystemSource="OJ:C:2011:127:0001:0007:EN:PDF"/>
</lrml:References>
<lrml:LegalSources>
<lrml:LegalSource key="ref3" sameAs="
<lrml:LegalSource key="ref4" sameAs="
</lrml:LegalSources>
<lrml:Associations key="sourceBlock1">
<lrml:Association>
<lrml:appliesSource keyref="#ref1"/>
<lrml:toTarget keyref="#rule_1a"/>
</lrml:Association>
<lrml:appliesSource keyref="#ref3"/>
<lrml:toTarget keyref="
</lrml:Associations>

26. Metamodel: Rule Context and (Legal) Sources
LegalRuleML documents provide a context (Context) for the legal rules expressed by textual provisions
Context includes associations between sources and parts of the rules (AssociationCollection)

27. Concept of Context
Context block describes metadata on rules or on other important parts of the knowledge base (e.g.
<lrml:Context key="ruleInfo2">
<lrml:appliesAssociations>
<lrml:Associations key="sourceBlock2">
<lrml:Association>
<lrml:appliesSource keyref="#ref2"/>
<lrml:toTarget keyref="#rule_1a"/>
</lrml:Association>
<lrml:toTarget keyref="
</lrml:Associations>
</lrml:appliesAssociations>
<lrml:toStatement keyref="#rule_1a"/>
<lrml:toStatement keyref="/ex2.1.1-references-b#rule_1b"/>
</lrml:Context>

28. Context blocks
<lrml:appliesSource keyref="#sec2.1-list1-itm31-par3-v2"/>
<lrml:appliesTemporalCharacteristics keyref="#tblock3"/>
<lrml:appliesStrength iri="&defeasible-ontology;#defeasible2"/>
<lrml:appliesModality iri="&deontic-ontology;#ob2"/>
<lrml:appliesJurisdiction keyref="&jurisdictions;us"/>
<lrml:appliesAuthority keyref="#congress"/>
<lrml:appliesRole>

29. Associations Associations Roles <lrml:Association>
two types of roles
N, M role fillers
N*M dyadic links
Roles
Source
Target
Temporal Characteristics
<lrml:Association>
<lrml:appliesSource keyref="#sec2.1- list1-itm31-par2-snt2-v2"/>
<lrml:toTarget keyref="#rule3-rel1-v2"/>
</lrml:Association>
<lrml:appliesSource keyref="#sec2.1- list1-itm31-par2-snt3-v2"/>
<lrml:toTarget keyref="#rule4-rel1-v2"/>
<lrml:toTarget keyref="#rule4-rel2-v2"/>

30. Metamodel: Metadata Role, Authority, Jurisdiction
Metadata concepts and properties are grounded in Dublin Core, FRBR as subclasses and sub-properties
Various roles, such as author or editor, are identified by the type of the Role concept
FRBR: Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records

31. Agent, Authority <lrml:Agents>
<!-- type="&lrmlv;Co-Author" -->
<lrml:Agent key="aut1" sameAs="&unibo;/person.owl#m.palmirani"/>
<lrml:Agent key="aut2" sameAs="&unibo;/person.owl#t.ognibene"/>
<lrml:Agent key="mad" sameAs="&unibo;/organization.owl#mad"/>
</lrml:Agents>
<lrml:Authorities>
<lrml:Authority key="congress" sameAs="&unibo;/organization.owl#congress">
<lrml:type iri="&lrmlv;Legislature"/>
</lrml:Authority>

32. Document Structure: Collections, Contexts, Rulebases
<lrml:LegalRuleML> <lrml:References> <Reference> </lrml:References> <lrml:Context key="ruleInfo1-v2">
<lrml:Association>
<lrml:appliesSource keyref="#sec2.1-list1-itm31-par1- v2"/>
<lrml:toTarget keyref="#rulebase1-v2"/>
</lrml:Association>
</lrml:Context>
<lrml:hasStatements key="rulebase-v2">
<lrml:ConstitutiveStatement key="rule1a-v2">
<ruleml:if> ...</ruleml:if>
<ruleml:then>... </ruleml:then>
</lrml:ConstitutiveStatement>
</lrml:hasStatements>...
</lrml:LegalRuleML>
Textual References
Rule Context parameters like agents, times, sources
Association between Text and Rules
N:M relationship
Rules

33. Metamodel: temporal Legal rules change over time.
Each rule has a TimeInstantCollection (instant or interval)
and TemporalCaratheristicCollection (inforce/efficacy, start/end)
Example: ex2.1.4-temporal.lrml

34. Deontic operators
Obligation, Right, Permission, Proibhition <lrml:Prohibition key="prohib2">
<lrml:Obligation key="ob1">
<lrml:Permission> <lrml:Right>
Penalty, Reparation, Behaviors

35. Penalty (¬A =>B) (¬B=>C)
Set of obligations/rights in case of infringement of another obligation/prohibition
<lrml:Penalty key="pen2">
<lrml:SuborderList key="behav1">
<lrml:Obligation key="oblig101">
<ruleml:slot>
<lrml:Subject iri="&deontic-ontology;#obligsub1"/>
<ruleml:Ind>Y</ruleml:Ind>
</ruleml:slot>
<ruleml:Atom key="atom109">
<ruleml:Rel iri="#rel3"/>
<ruleml:Ind>X</ruleml:Ind>
</ruleml:Atom>
</lrml:Obligation>
<lrml:Obligation key="oblig102">……
<lrml:Obligation key="oblig103">……
</lrml:SuborderList>
</lrml:Penalty>
(¬A =>B)
(¬B=>C)
Obligation101
Obligation102
Obligation103

36. PrescriptiveStatement
Reparation
Reparation
Penalty
PrescriptiveStatement
<lrml:Reparation key="rep3">
<lrml:appliesAssociation>
<lrml:Association key="assoc3">
<lrml:appliesPenalty keyref="#pen1"/>
<lrml:appliesPenalty keyref="#pen2"/>
<lrml:toTarget keyref="#ps1"/>
</lrml:Association>
</lrml:appliesAssociation>
</lrml:Reparation>

37. Facts <lrml:hasStatement>
<lrml:FactualStatement key="fact1">
<lrml:hasTemplate>
<ruleml:Atom key=":atom11">
<ruleml:Rel iri="#rel5"/>
<ruleml:Ind iri="#JohnDoe"/>
</ruleml:Atom>
</lrml:hasTemplate>
</lrml:FactualStatement>
</lrml:hasStatement>

38. LegalRuleML Use Case #1 Defeasibility and Rule Sources Guido Governatori, Monica Palmirani, Tara Athan

39. Date of Registration: 11 July 2012 Date of Efficacy: 1 September 2012
Complaint example from Telecommunications Consumer Protections Code C628:2012, Australia
Date of Assent: 30 May 2012
sec2.1-v2
sec2.1-list1-itm31-v2
par1-v2
par2-v2
par3-v2
2.1
Complaint
means an expression of dissatisfaction made to a Supplier in relation to its Telecommunications Products or the complaints handling process itself, where a response or Resolution is explicitly or implicitly expected by the Consumer.
An initial call to a provider to request a service or information or to request support is not necessarily a Complaint. An initial call to report a fault or service difficulty is not a Complaint. However, if a Customer advises that they want this initial call treated as a Complaint, the Supplier will also treat this initial call as a Complaint.
If a Supplier is uncertain, a Supplier must ask a Customer if they wish to make a Complaint and must rely on the Customer‟s response.
Date of Registration: 11 July 2012
Date of Efficacy: 1 September 2012
rule1a
rule2
rule3
rule1b
rule1b<rule2
rule1b<rule3
rule3<rule4
rule4

40. Metamodel: defeasible
Defeasible logic is a non-monotonic logic that helps to manage norms conflicting, exceptions, inconsistency between norms over time
RuleText is connected to the RuleContext where the relation appliesStrenght indicates the type of rule (strict, defeasible, defeater)
Overrides defines a binary relationship that indicates the priority among two rules (r2>r1)

41. Rule Contexts with Temporal Metadata
Defeasible qualification
<lrml:Context key="ruleInfo4-v2">
<lrml:appliesStrength iri="&lrmlv;#defeasible"/>
<lrml:appliesAssociations>
<lrml:Associations key="sourceBlock4-v2">
<lrml:Association>
<lrml:appliesSource keyref="#sec2.1-list1-itm31- par3-v2"/>
<lrml:toTarget keyref="#rulebase5-v2"/>
</lrml:Association>
<lrml:appliesTemporalCharacteristics keyref="#tblock3"/>
<lrml:toTarget keyref="#rulebase3-v2"/>
<lrml:toTarget keyref="#rule5-v2"/>
</lrml:Associations>
</lrml:appliesAssociations>
<lrml:toStatement keyref="#rule5-v2"/>
Source info
Temporal info
Rule5-v2

42. Complaint example from TCP Code C628:2012, Australia
<lrml:hasStatements key="rulebase1-v2">
<lrml:ConstitutiveStatement key="rule1a-v2">
<ruleml:if>
<ruleml:Atom key="rule1-atom1-v2">
<ruleml:Rel iri="#complaint-v2"/>
<ruleml:Var>X</ruleml:Var>
</ruleml:Atom>
</ruleml:if>
<ruleml:then>
<ruleml:Atom key="rule1-atom2-v2">
<ruleml:Rel iri="#rule1-rel2-v2">is an expression of dissatisfaction made to a Supplier in relation to its Telecommunications Products or the complaints handling process itself, where a response or Resolution is explicitly or implicitly expected by the Consumer</ruleml:Rel>
</ruleml:then>
</lrml:ConstitutiveStatement>

43. Complaint example from TCP Code C628:2012, Australia
<lrml:PrescritiveStatement key="rule5-v2">
<lrml:if>
<ruleml:Atom key="rule5-atom1-v2">
<ruleml:Rel iri="rule5-rel1-v2">is uncertain if/wishes to make a Complaint</ruleml:Rel>
<ruleml:Var type="#supplier-v2">S</ruleml:Var>
<ruleml:Var type="#customer-v2">C</ruleml:Var>
</ruleml:Atom>
</lrml:if>
<lrml:then>
<lrml:Obligation key="rule5-ob1-v2">
<lrml:And key="rule5-and1-v2">
<ruleml:Atom key="rule5-atom2-v2">
<ruleml:Rel iri="rule5-rel2-v2">asks/if they wish to make a Complaint</ruleml:Rel>
<ruleml:Var>S</ruleml:Var>
<ruleml:Var>C</ruleml:Var>
<ruleml:Atom key="rule5-atom3-v2">
<ruleml:Rel iri="#rule5-rel3-v2">relies on the response of</ruleml:Rel>
</lrml:And>
</lrml:Obligation>
</lrml:then>
</lrml:PrescriptiveStatement>

44. Defeasibility <lrml:hasQualification>
<lrml:Overrides over="#rule2-v2" under="#rule1b-v2“/>
</lrml:hasQualification>
<lrml:Overrides over="#rule3-v2" under="#rule1b-v2"/>
<lrml:Overrides over="#rule4-v2" under="#rule3-v2"/>
<lrml:Overrides over="#rule5-v2" under="#rule3-v2"/>

45. LegalRuleML Use Case #2 Temporal Model Monica Palmirani Tara Athan

46. Copyright law: temporal versions
Requirements: associate rules to their sources over time and to assign temporal dimensions to the rules
US “Digital Millenium Act” and modifications
Specific goal: in tx calculate the proper statutory damage in case of violation of the copyright taking in consideration all the exceptions and the modifications respect an fact.
17 USC Sec. 504
Remedies for infringement: Damages and profits
Interval of efficacy of the norm
Statutory Damages
[Jan. 1, 1978, March 1, 1989 [
$250 <= statutoryDamages <= $10,000
[March 1, 1989, Dec. 9, 1999 [
$500 <= statutoryDamages <= $20,000
[Dec. 9, 1999, ∞
$750 <= statutoryDamages <= $30,000

47. (c) Statutory Damages. -
Efficacy period [Jan. 1, 1978, March 1, 1989 [
(c) Statutory Damages. -
The copyright owner may elect an award of statutory damages for infringements in a sum of not less than $250 or more than $10,000 as the court considers just.
Efficacy period [March 1, 1989, Dec. 9, 1999 [
(c) Statutory Damages. -
The copyright owner may elect an award of statutory damages for infringements in a sum of not less than $500 or more than $20,000 as the court considers just.
Efficacy period [Dec. 9, 1999, ∞ [
(c) Statutory Damages. -
The copyright owner may elect an award of statutory damages for infringements in a sum of not less than $750 or more than $30,000 as the court considers just.

48. Resources with URI <lrml:LegalSources>
<lrml:memberType iri="&lkif;#Code"/>
<lrml:LegalSource key="sec504-clsa-pnt1" sameAs="&UScode;#title17-chp5-sec504-clsa-lst1-pnt1"/>
<lrml:LegalSource key="sec504-clsa-pnt2" sameAs="&UScode;#title17-chp5-sec504-clsa-lst1-pnt2"/>
<lrml:LegalSource key="sec504-clsb" sameAs="&UScode;#title17-chp5-sec504-clsb"/>
<lrml:LegalSource key="sec504-clsc-pnt1" sameAs="&UScode;#title17-chp5-sec504-clsc-lst1-pnt1"/>
<lrml:LegalSource key="sec504-clsc-pnt2-sb1" sameAs="&UScode;#title17-chp5-sec504-clsc-lst1-pnt2-subpar1"/>
<lrml:LegalSource key="sec504-clsc-pnt2-sb2" sameAs="&UScode;#title17-chp5-sec504-clsc-lst1-pnt2-subpar2"/>
<lrml:LegalSource key="sec504-clsc-pnt2-sb3" sameAs="&UScode;#title17-chp5-sec504-clsc-lst1-pnt2-subpar3"/>
</lrml:LegalSources>
<lrml:memberType iri="&lkif;#Precedent"/>
<lrml:LegalSource key="mad2005" sameAs="&judgment1;"/>
<lrml:LegalSource key="mad2012" sameAs="&judgment2;"/>

49. LIST OF NEUTRAL TIME INSTANTS Type of event connected with an ontology
Time information
<lrml:TimeInstants>
<ruleml:Time key="t1">
<ruleml:Data xsi:type="xs:date"> </ruleml:Data>
</ruleml:Time>
<ruleml:Time key="t2">
<ruleml:Data xsi:type="xs:date"> </ruleml:Data>
</lrml:TimeInstants>
LIST OF NEUTRAL TIME INSTANTS
Type of event connected with an ontology
<lrml:TemporalCharacteristics key="tblock1">
<lrml:TemporalCharacteristic key="e1-b">
<lrml:forRuleStatus iri="&lrmlv;#Efficacious"/>
<lrml:hasStatusDevelopment iri="&lrmlv;#Starts"/>
<lrml:atTimeInstant keyref="#t1"/>
</lrml:TemporalCharacteristic>
Interval or Instant

50. Context with Association
<lrml:Context key="ruleInfo1" hasCreationDate="#t8">
<lrml:appliesTemporalCharacteristics keyref="#tblock1"/>
<lrml:appliesStrength iri="&lrmlv;defeasible"/>
<lrml:appliesRole>
<lrml:Role iri="&lrmlv;#Author">
<lrml:filledBy keyref="#aut1"/>
</lrml:Role>
</lrml:appliesRole>
<lrml:appliesAuthority keyref="#congress"/>
<lrml:appliesJurisdiction keyref="&jurisdictions;us"/>
<lrml:appliesAssociations>
<lrml:Associations key="sourceBlock1">
<lrml:Association>
<lrml:appliesSource keyref="#sec504-clsc-pnt1"/>
<lrml:toTarget keyref="#rule1-penalty1"/>
</lrml:Association>
</lrml:Associations>
</lrml:appliesAssociations>
<lrml:toStatement keyref="#rule1"/>
Temporal info
Author of the modelling
Defeasible qualification
Jurisdiction
Sources
Destination

51. LegalRuleML: A proof-of-concept
Monica Palmirani
University of Bologna, CIRSFID

52. Detect the impacts of the modifications on the rules
NORMS
&
Adm.Acts
Jurispru
dence
Case-Law 1
Scenario
RDFa or RDF
Linked Data
enrichment of the
XML or HTML5 annotation 6
Legal
Ontology
Concepts
original
Text
in XML
@original
AKOMA NTOSO of
LEGALDOCML
isomorphism 2
Legal t1
Text
in XML
@t1
Mod art. 23
Detect the impacts of the
modifications on the rules
XML
Rep. KB
XPath
Xquery 4
Legal t2
Text
in XML
@t2 3
Ontology
Engine
Legal
Resoner
Facts tj
Proof
New knowledge 5
KBtj

53. Architecture Web editor for text and rules (http://www.tinymce.com/)
Web Rule Viewer
Native XML-database eXist
Drools first prototype

54. Conclusion and Future plans
LegalRuleML wants to be close to the legal domain competences and produce a code readable by human and by machine
RDF approach helps to foster the Linked Data collection
Proof-of-concept are developed
Future work: complex event modelling inside of the norms, meta-rules, case-law, extensibility of the schema, good documentation and pilot cases.

55. LegalRuleML Use Case #4 Rules for International Carriage by Air Giuseppe Contissa

56. ConstitutiveRule
Article 17 Death and Injury of Passengers - Damage to Baggage 1. The carrier is liable for damage sustained in case of death or bodily injury of a passenger upon condition only that the accident which caused the death or injury took place on board the aircraft or in the course of any of the operations of embarking or disembarking.
ConstitutiveRule: liable

57. Defeasible
2. The carrier is liable for damage sustained in case of destruction or loss of, or of damage to, checked baggage upon condition only that the event which caused the destruction, loss or damage took place on board the aircraft or during any period within which the checked baggage was in the charge of the carrier. However, the carrier is not liable if and to the extent that the damage resulted from the inherent defect, quality or vice of the baggage. In the case of unchecked baggage, including personal items, the carrier is liable if the damage resulted from its fault or that of its servants or agents.
Constitutive Rule: definition of liability of the carrier+ exception

58. Obligation: to pay
Article 21 Compensation in Case of Death or Injury of Passengers 1. For damages arising under paragraph 1 of Article 17 not exceeding 100,000 Special Drawing Rights for each passenger, the carrier shall not be able to exclude or limit its liability.

59. LegalRuleML Use Case #3 National Consumer Credit Protection Act 2009: Section 29 Guido Governatori

60. Deontic National Consumer Credit Protection Act 2009: Section 29
(Prohibition on engaging in credit activities without a licence)
(1) A person must not engage in a credit activity if the person does not hold a licence authorising the person to engage in the credit activity.
Civil penalty: 2,000 penalty units.
omissis
Criminal penalty: 200 penalty units, or 2 years imprisonment, or both

61. rule1: It is forbidden to engage credit activity
rule2: A person can engage in a credit activity if the person hold a licence
rule2 override rule1
penalties
reparations

62. Thank you for your attention! and joint to LegalRuleML TC