This dissertation adopts an interdisciplinary approach to the field of law and artificial intelligence. It argues that the conceptual structuring of legal knowledge within an appropriate theoretical framework is of primary importance when building knowledge-based systems. While technical considerations also play a role, they must take second place to an in-depth understanding of the law. Two alternative methods of structuring legal knowledge in very different domains are used to explore the thesis. A deep-structure approach is used on nervous shock, a rather obscure area of the law of negligence. A script-based method is applied to impaired driving, a well-known part of the criminal law. A knowledge-based system is implemented in each area. The two systems, Nervous Shock Advisor (NSA) and Impaired Driving Advisor (IDA), and the methodologies they embody, are described and contrasted. In light of the work undertaken, consideration is given to the feasibility of lawyers without much technical knowledge using general-purpose tools to build knowledge-based systems for themselves. / Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies / Graduate

The thesis addresses lawyers’ information seeking in England and Wales. It aims to gain an understanding of lawyers’ information needs and use of resources relating to case law, statute and commentary, both hardcopy and electronic, with an interest in open access resources in particular. The study comprised of semi-structured interviews of 11 legal professionals qualified to practice in England and Wales. Data was analysed using thematic analysis. Questions were designed to elicit what resources participants used, what they found advantageous or disadvantageous about these resources, and any other factors that influenced whether a resource was used or not. The homogeneous participant group means results are mostly applicable to solicitors early in their career working in large firms, but some conclusions can be drawn as to use of open access by legal professionals. An electronic format is no barrier to use. Open access resources are used alongside commercial and free resources. Open access resources are perceived as advantageous for specific tasks. What is perceived as advantageous or disadvantageous depends on a number of underlying factors, such as task, task complexity and environment. However, although having beneficial features can affect resource use, advantageous characteristics are not enough to guarantee use. Lloyd’s theory of information literacy is of help in explaining resource selection. The study’s findings support other models of information seeking behaviour, especially Ellis’s model.

Since the acknowledgement of the entrapment defense by the Supreme Court in the case of Sorrells v. United States 287 U.S. 435 (1932) there have been discussions on how it should be applied. There are two schools of thought for the application of the entrapment defense. One is the objective test and the other is the subjective test for entrapment. The subjective test focuses on the defendant's predisposition while the objective test focuses on the activity of the government. The federal courts and thirty eight states use the subjective test for entrapment. Florida is one of the states that use the subjective test for entrapment. The majority of this study is focused on the history and application of the entrapment defense, with a focus on the state of Florida. The study will aim to examine the ramifications of applying a subjective test for entrapment. Furthermore, this study will shed some light on problems with the way the entrapment defense is applied in Florida. This study has led to new ideas about how and why a new test for entrapment should be embraced by the courts in Florida.

Across the country, African American defendants are being discriminated against in the criminal courts and by juries, particularly in capital cases.[1] This assertion is supported by two lines of research. First, an analysis of Supreme Court decisions focusing on the racial impact on voir dire. Second, social-legal studies on juror decision making have demonstrated legal and socio-legal histories providing evidence that demonstrate there is a racial bias in our system. Based on these findings, this paper sets forth several legal and policy recommendations to improve the fair adjudication of African American defendants charged with capital crimes. [1] Jack Glaser, Karin D. Martin, Kimberly B. Kahn, Possibility of Death Sentence Has Divergent Effect on Verdicts for Black and White Defendants (2015).

Com o declínio do ideal de reabilitação, a partir principalmente de 1970, impulsionado pelo fracasso do modelo de exclusão para inclusão, muitas jurisdições ocidentais passaram a colocar a retribuição e a proporcionalidade no centro da decisão sobre a pena, com o objetivo de diminuir disparidades entre penas, ou seja, garantir que pessoas que cometem crimes de gravidade semelhante recebam penas semelhantes. Práticas que visam aumentar a uniformidade das penas em relação ao tipo penal como penas mínimas, aumentos obrigatórios de pena e obrigação de cumprimento de determinado tempo de pena antes de progredir de regime - envolvem, necessariamente, a imposição de obstáculos à individualização da pena pelo juiz e podem ocultar desigualdade maior: o tratamento semelhante de casos distintos. A pesquisa empírica desenvolvida no trabalho baseia-se na análise de casos concretos de roubo com causa de aumento (conduta responsável por mais da metade da população prisional brasileira) em que foi aplicada a pena mínima, de 5 anos e 4 meses de prisão. O estudo dos casos revelou situações concretas muito distintas entre si com a mesma pena, muitas vezes inclusive com a mesma fundamentação, o que aponta para uma padronização da decisão judicial nesses casos. A definição de pena em abstrato pelo legislador, em função da gravidade do crime, garante que pessoas condenadas pelos mesmos tipos penais recebam penas semelhantes, mas oculta inúmeras diferenças entre os casos concretos. Esta dissertação argumenta contra o uso da igualdade e da proporcionalidade princípios que têm papel fundamental para coibir o abuso do poder estatal para impedir o juiz de reduzir a pena ou de aplicar sanção alternativa à prisão, quando a pena prevista em lei não for adequada. Permitir maior individualização da pena não significa patrocinar um sistema de penas indeterminadas de prisão, mas sim atribuir a tarefa de escolha da pena a quem tem o caso diante dos olhos, sempre com critérios que guiem e controlem a decisão por motivação, até para que seja possível o desenvolvimento de um verdadeiro sistema de alternativas à prisão. / From 1970 onwards, with the decline of the rehabilitative ideal, driven in part by the failure of the social exclusion rehabilitation model, many jurisdictions turned to retribution and proportionality to answer the question of how much to punish. The intentions were noble: to reduce sentencing disparity, guarantying that offenses of similar gravity receive similarly harsh sentences. Strategies aimed at improving sentencing uniformity e.g. minimum mandatory sentences, mandatory aggravating factors and parole restrictions necessarily obstruct sentencing discretion and may conceal even greater inequality, consisting of similar treatment of unlike situated offenders. In my empirical research, I study sentencing decisions for robbery offenses (robbery convictions make up for more than half of Brazilian prison population) in which the same punishment has been decided upon (prison term of 5 years and 4 months) and, in a qualitative approach, analyze what they have in common and which differences the sentencing decision does not distinguish. I found many cases with very different concrete circumstances, with the same prison sentence and even with the same judicial reasoning, which points towards an unfair case aggregation. The definition of adequate punishment by the legislative body, based only on offense gravity, may make people convicted of similar offenses receive the same sentences, but conceals many differences between each case. I argue against the use of equality and proportionality ideals that once served exclusively for individual protection from the State to prevent the judge from reducing a sentence or from applying intermediate punishment in a given case. To allow greater individualization is different from favoring indeterminate sentencing. It means assigning the sentencing task to the person who has the case before them, always with guidelines that may control the decision through motivation, so maybe it finally becomes possible to develop a true system of alternatives to imprisonment.

Com o declínio do ideal de reabilitação, a partir principalmente de 1970, impulsionado pelo fracasso do modelo de exclusão para inclusão, muitas jurisdições ocidentais passaram a colocar a retribuição e a proporcionalidade no centro da decisão sobre a pena, com o objetivo de diminuir disparidades entre penas, ou seja, garantir que pessoas que cometem crimes de gravidade semelhante recebam penas semelhantes. Práticas que visam aumentar a uniformidade das penas em relação ao tipo penal como penas mínimas, aumentos obrigatórios de pena e obrigação de cumprimento de determinado tempo de pena antes de progredir de regime - envolvem, necessariamente, a imposição de obstáculos à individualização da pena pelo juiz e podem ocultar desigualdade maior: o tratamento semelhante de casos distintos. A pesquisa empírica desenvolvida no trabalho baseia-se na análise de casos concretos de roubo com causa de aumento (conduta responsável por mais da metade da população prisional brasileira) em que foi aplicada a pena mínima, de 5 anos e 4 meses de prisão. O estudo dos casos revelou situações concretas muito distintas entre si com a mesma pena, muitas vezes inclusive com a mesma fundamentação, o que aponta para uma padronização da decisão judicial nesses casos. A definição de pena em abstrato pelo legislador, em função da gravidade do crime, garante que pessoas condenadas pelos mesmos tipos penais recebam penas semelhantes, mas oculta inúmeras diferenças entre os casos concretos. Esta dissertação argumenta contra o uso da igualdade e da proporcionalidade princípios que têm papel fundamental para coibir o abuso do poder estatal para impedir o juiz de reduzir a pena ou de aplicar sanção alternativa à prisão, quando a pena prevista em lei não for adequada. Permitir maior individualização da pena não significa patrocinar um sistema de penas indeterminadas de prisão, mas sim atribuir a tarefa de escolha da pena a quem tem o caso diante dos olhos, sempre com critérios que guiem e controlem a decisão por motivação, até para que seja possível o desenvolvimento de um verdadeiro sistema de alternativas à prisão. / From 1970 onwards, with the decline of the rehabilitative ideal, driven in part by the failure of the social exclusion rehabilitation model, many jurisdictions turned to retribution and proportionality to answer the question of how much to punish. The intentions were noble: to reduce sentencing disparity, guarantying that offenses of similar gravity receive similarly harsh sentences. Strategies aimed at improving sentencing uniformity e.g. minimum mandatory sentences, mandatory aggravating factors and parole restrictions necessarily obstruct sentencing discretion and may conceal even greater inequality, consisting of similar treatment of unlike situated offenders. In my empirical research, I study sentencing decisions for robbery offenses (robbery convictions make up for more than half of Brazilian prison population) in which the same punishment has been decided upon (prison term of 5 years and 4 months) and, in a qualitative approach, analyze what they have in common and which differences the sentencing decision does not distinguish. I found many cases with very different concrete circumstances, with the same prison sentence and even with the same judicial reasoning, which points towards an unfair case aggregation. The definition of adequate punishment by the legislative body, based only on offense gravity, may make people convicted of similar offenses receive the same sentences, but conceals many differences between each case. I argue against the use of equality and proportionality ideals that once served exclusively for individual protection from the State to prevent the judge from reducing a sentence or from applying intermediate punishment in a given case. To allow greater individualization is different from favoring indeterminate sentencing. It means assigning the sentencing task to the person who has the case before them, always with guidelines that may control the decision through motivation, so maybe it finally becomes possible to develop a true system of alternatives to imprisonment.

D. Litt. et Phil. / The main research question addressed by this study is whether the application of information and communication technologies (ICTs) has an effect on the practice of law, and specifically whether information and knowledge management affects the process of legal research. Various issues are considered in this regard, including what the concept of knowledge management (KM) entails in a law firm and what the current KM trends are in South African law firms. To this extent an investigation follows of the global trends in the application of ICTs for legal research purposes and what the specific applications are of KM in support of legal research. Furthermore, this study investigates how information technology applications and KM systems and strategies can support the legal research process and what the benefits of KM are to legal research. This entails a study of the unique characteristics of legal research in a digital information environment and of the challenges legal researchers face in a changing information environment. Subsequently the skills and tools that are required for effective digital legal research are discussed. This research also considers the effect the changing information environment has on the role of the legal information professional, which includes an investigation of the reasons why legal information professionals can and should support lawyers in their legal research activities. Specifically, this study considers the roles, skills and competencies of legal information professionals as knowledge managers, digital librarians and trainers of legal research skills in a changing information environment. Lastly, this study investigates whether current legal research skills training offers useful guidelines to future digital legal researchers.

Could it be that even though no international treaty or regulation regulates bioprospecting in Antarctica, some features of the techno-science of bioprospecting already lie embedded in the deep texts of the potentially most relevant treaties and regulations? If so, international law already to that extent comprehends the phenomenon, making for sustainable governance and thereby sustainable development. To find out, first an ontology of bioprospecting was synthesized, by an activity theory based conceptual system modeling (CSM). Treating bioprospecting as an activity of search for and research of naturally occurring biota, a set of Conceptual Graphs and associated Tables were drawn up as its ontology-synthesis. Features of this conceptualization were then searched for by an ontological-analysis of the deep texts of selected twenty-five legal instruments, through an ontological legal research (OLR). Search results did unearth several features dispersed and intriguingly embedded in several of the treaties and regulations, quite richly in some of the more recent ones. The cross-application of CSM followed by the hybridized OLR, is a methodological innovation and the generated empirical results of each are resources for further research. The language of international law is revealed as possessing a surprisingly better-than-expected techno-scientific literacy of bioprospecting.

Law schools are criticized for graduating students who lack the skills necessary to practice law. Legal research is a foundational ability necessary to support lawyering competency. The American Bar Association (ABA) establishes standards for legal education that include a requirement that each law student receive substantial instruction in legal skills, including legal research. Despite the recognized importance of legal research in legal education, there is no consensus of what to teach as part of a legal research course or even how to teach such a course. Legal educators struggle to address these issues. The practicing bar and judiciary have expressed concerns about law school graduates ability to conduct legal research. Studies have been conducted detailing the poor research ability of law students and their lack of skills. Although deficiencies in law student research skills have been identified, there is no agreement as to how to remediate these deficiencies. This dissertation suggests the legal research resources that should be taught in law schools by identifying the research resources used by practicing attorneys and comparing them to those resources currently included in legal research instruction at the 202 ABA-accredited law schools. Multiple data sources were used in this study. Practitioner resource information was based on data provided by practicing attorneys responding to the 2013 ABA Legal Technology Survey. Resources taught in ABA-accredited law schools were identified through three sources: a 2014 law school legal research survey sent to the 202 ABA-accredited law schools, a review of law school syllabi from ABA-accredited law school legal research and legal research and writing courses, and the Association of Legal Writing Directors 2013 annual survey of legal research and writing faculty. The combined data from these three sources were compared to the resources used by practicing lawyers identified in the annual national 2013 ABA Legal Technology Survey. This comparison of what is taught with what is used in practice identifies a deficiency in law school instruction in the research resources used by practicing attorneys. These survey results detail distinct areas of inadequate instruction in legal research resources and provide legal educators with detailed information necessary to develop a curriculum that will result in graduating students with practice-ready competencies.

This paper is a critical evaluation of the Swedish system with special mediation. The district court has the opportunity, in cases that are amenable to out-of-court settlements, to refer the dispute to special mediation. However, this is extremely rare, even though the legislature expressed a desire to increase the use of alternative dispute resolution. In 2011, a series of measures were taken to increase the use of mediation and strengthen mediation attractiveness. What effect can be inferred from these actions today, over three years after their introduction? This study analyses the main reasons offered for why mediation is not used more, and what should be done to increase the use of mediation. Is the court-annexed mediation an appropriate way forward for Sweden? To answer these problem formulations I studied statistics from the Swedish National Courts Administration (Domstolsverket). In order to investigate how the Swedish mediators experience the practice, I did a survey that was sent to the mediators listed on the Swedish National Courts Administration´s catalogue on mediators. To deepen the knowledge of mediation as a practice and get a perspective on the special court mediation, I conducted an in-depth interview with Nicklas Söderberg, Head of Administration of the Court of Appeal in Skåne and Blekinge. My material shows that the Court's duty to promote conciliation was strengthened by the government's measures in 2011. However, the Mediation Act (Lag om medling i privaträttsliga tvister), according to the material, did not have the intended impact on the use of mediation; special mediation is very rarely used. The reason to the meagre effects is that the measures do not address the three largest mediation hindering factors; regulatory barriers, cost considerations and lack of knowledge and foundation in the Swedish legal culture. To increase the use of mediation and reach all of its benefits, I believe, in the light of the material in this paper, a new system that addresses the needs of those hindering factors is necessary. The legislation provides opportunity for broad discussions with the parties during the initial Court preparations. However, the process could be more clear, effective and legally certain by developing Court-annexed mediation. Court-annexed mediation can reduce the courts caseload, save time for the parties and provide more sustainable and appropriate solutions to the parties' disputes. To anchor mediation in Swedish legal culture and increase the use of the procedure, I advocate that Court-annexed mediation should be introduced. / Denna uppsats är en kritisk utvärdering av det svenska systemet med särskild medling. Tingsrätten har möjlighet att i dispositiva tvistemål hänvisa tvisten till särskild medling. Detta sker dock ytterst sällan, trots att lagstiftaren uttalat en vilja att öka användandet av alternativa tvistlösningsmetoder. År 2011 genomfördes en rad åtgärder för att öka användningen av medling samt stärka medlingens attraktionskraft. Vilken effekt kan utläsas av dessa åtgärder idag, drygt tre år efter deras införande? I denna uppsats utreds vilka huvudanledningar som finns till varför särskild medling inte används mer, samt vad som bör göras för att komma tillrätta med detta. Är rättsmedling en lämplig väg framåt för Sverige? För att svara på dessa problemformuleringar studerades statistik från domstolsverket. För att undersöka hur svenska medlare upplever förfarandet gjorde jag en enkätundersökning som skickades till medlare upptagna på domstolsverkets förteckning över medlare. För att fördjupa kunskapen om medling i praktiken och få ett domstolsperspektiv på särskild medling genomförde jag en djupintervju med Nicklas Söderberg, administrativ chef för hovrätten i Skåne och Blekinge. Mitt material visar att rättens skyldighet att verka för förlikning stärkts av regeringens åtgärder år 2011. Medlingslagen har dock, enligt materialet, inte haft avsedd inverkan på användandet av medling; särskild medling används mycket sällan. Anledningen till att effekterna uteblivit är att åtgärderna inte adresserar de tre största medlingshämmande faktorerna; lagstiftningsmässiga hinder, kostnadsaspekter samt brist på kunskap och förankring i svensk rättskultur.  För att öka användningen av medling och nå alla dess fördelar anser jag, mot bakgrund av materialet i denna uppsats, att en ny ordning måste till som adresserar dessa medlingshämmande faktorer. Lagstiftningen ger utrymme för att hålla breda samtal med parterna under förberedelsen, dock skulle förfarandet bli tydligare, mer ändamålsenligt och rättssäkert genom att utforma en lagstiftning gällande rättsmedling.  Rättsmedling kan avlasta domstolarna, spara tid för parterna samt ge mer hållbara och ändamålsenliga lösningar på parternas tvister. För att förankra medlingen i svensk rättskultur och öka användandet av förfarandet förespråkar jag att rättsmedling borde införas.