FrameNet Model of the Suspension of Norms

• Autore: Monica Palmirani - Marcello Ceci
• Carica: Associate Professor of Legal Informatics of the LawSchool ofUniversity of Bologna and member of the CIRSFID, University of Bologna - Ph.D student of Legal Informatics, CIRSFID, University of Bologna
• Pagine: 263-279

FrameNet Model of the Suspension of Norms

MONI CA PALM IRA NI, MA RCEL LO CEC I∗

SUMM ARY:1. Introduction – 2. Temporal Dimension in the Legislation – 3. Anatomy

of Temporal Modif‌icatory Provision – 4. Suspension of Eff‌icacy – 4.1. Suspension

Provision – 4.2. Disapplication Provision – 4.3. Modif‌ication of Suspending Provision

– 5. Language Regularity of Suspension Provision – 6. Modelling Suspensions Using

FrameNet – 7. From the Text Structure to the Legal Semantics – 8. Clearance of the

Suspension Model – 9. Conclusions

1. INT RODU CTI ON

Legal documents and legal systems are by nature dynamic (they change

over time). Modif‌ications affect legal texts, their temporal properties, and

even the meanings of the norms expressed in those texts. One of the main

goals in the research conducted over the last ten years on digitalization in

the legal domain1has been to provide techniques for producing updated col-

lections of legal documents on the Web in such a way as to manage change

through a consolidation process: this would help citizens, businesses and so-

cial actors generally in understanding their rights and duties in any specif‌ic

time and in a given context.

It is in order to make it possible to annotate this information as meta-

data that several XML standards have been developed (Akoma Ntoso, NiR,

Cen/Metalex), along with ontologies2and a document metadata framework

∗M. Palmiraniis Associate Professor of Legal Informatics of the Law School of University

of Bologna and member of the CIRSFID, University of Bologna; M. Ceci is Ph.D student

of Legal Informatics, CIRSFID, University of Bologna. The Authors would like to thank

the ICT4Law project (http://www.ict4law.org/), coordinatedby Gianmaria Ajani as par t of

the Converging Technologies Programme f‌inanced by Piedmont Region, forsuppor ting this

research.

1European Forum of Off‌icial Gazettes. Consolidation Interim Report of the Work-

ing Group, 5th meeting, Madrid, September 25-26, 2008; T. ARNOL D-MOO RE,Automatic

Generation of Amendment Legislation, in “Proceedings of the ICAIL 1997 Conference”, pp.

56-62.

2J. BREU KER, A. B OER, R. H OEKS TRA, C. VAN DE N BERG,Developing Content for

LKIF: Ontologies and Framework for Legal Reasoning, in “Legal Knowledge and Informa-

tion Systems, JURIX 2006 Conference”, Amsterdam, IOS Press, 2006, pp. 41-50; C. LUP O,

F. VITALI , E. FRAN CESC ONI, M. PAL MIRA NI, R. WI NKE LS, E. DE MA AT, A. BOER, P.

MASC ELLA NI,General Xml Format(s) for Legal Sources, Estrella European Project IST-2004-

027655, Deliverable 3.1, Amsterdam UniversityFaculty of Law, Amsterdam, 2007.

264 Informatica e diritto /Proceedings of the Workshop LOAIT 2010

Fig. 1 – From the text to semantic

(LegalRDF3) inclusive of events, actors and outcomes expected by a mod-

if‌icatory action. These standards were designed to describe the semantic

meaning of some relevant legal phenomena (like dynamicity, or change over

time), to enrich the expressive power of XML representation, and to endow

XML legal documents with a richer semantic annotation.

These arguments and properties are often marked up manually with the

support of specialized parser-enhanced editors4or of Bayesian NLP tools5,

3J. MCCLUR E,Legal-RDF Vocabularies, Requirements & Design Rationale, in “Proceed-

ings of the 5th Legislative XML Workshop”,Firenze, European Press Academic Publishing,

2007, pp. 149-160.

4M. PALMI RANI, R. BRIG HI,An XML Editor for Legal Information Management, in

“Proceedings of DEXA 2003, Workshop on E-Government”, Berlin, Heidelberg, Springer-

Verlag, 2003, pp. 421-429; M. PALM IRAN I, R. BRI GHI, M. MA SSIN I,Automated Extraction

of Normative References in Legal Texts, in “Proceedings of ICAIL 2003”, New York, ACM

Press, 2003, pp. 105-106.

5E. FRAN CESC ONI, A. PAS SERI NI,Automatic Classif‌ication of Provisions in Legislative

Texts, in “Proceedings of the ICAIL 2007 Conference”, Vol. 15, pp. 1-17; E. DEMA AT,

R. WINK ELS,Automatic Classif‌ication of Sentences in Dutch Laws, in “Legal Knowledge and

Information Systems”, JURIX 2008, Amsterdam, IOS Press, 2008, pp. 207-216; C. BI AGI-

OLI, E. F RANCE SCON I, A. PASSE RINI, S. M ONTEMAGNI, C. SORI A,Automatic Semantics