Proceedings of the 11th Workshop on Nonmonotonic Reasoning

These are the proceedings of the 11th Nonmonotonic Reasoning Workshop. The aim of this series is to bring together active researchers in the broad area of nonmonotonic reasoning, including belief revision, reasoning about actions, planning, logic programming, argumentation, causality, probabilistic and possibilistic approaches to KR, and other related topics. As part of the program of the 11th workshop, we have assessed the status of the field and discussed issues such as: Significant recent achievements in the theory and automation of NMR; Critical short and long term goals for NMR; Emerging new research directions in NMR; Practical applications of NMR; Significance of NMR to knowledge representation and AI in general

Exploring justice in extreme cases: Criminal law theory and international criminal law

This thesis is about the criminal law theory of international criminal law (ICL). More specifically, the thesis focuses on one area of inquiry within criminal law theory: the fundamental moral constraining principles of criminal law (such as the culpability or legality principles).The main contribution of this thesis is to advance a method for identifying and clarifying the fundamental principles appropriate for ICL. I show that the most familiar sources of guidance are unreliable, and that efforts to find solid grounding are untenable. I propose a ‘coherentist’ method, which stipulates that we do not necessarily need a foundational ethical theory, or bedrock for beliefs. Instead, we can work productively at a middle level, using all of the available clues – including patterns of practice, normative arguments, and considered judgments. Currently prevailing understandings of the principles are contingent human constructs, but nonetheless we can make fruitful progress in applying and refining the best available constructs.The method is illustrated through an examination of command responsibility, an important but hotly contested doctrine. The inquiry shows problems in ICL jurisprudence and generates prescriptions for a law that responds fairly and effectively to a particular danger of human organization. Exploring the Frontiers of International La

Rethinking specificity in defeasible reasoning and its effect in argument reinstatement

The principle of reinstatement governing most argument systems states that an argument is reinstated when all its defeaters are in turn ultimately defeated. Nevertheless, some criticisms to this principle have been offered in the literature. We found that problems arise when arguments in a chain of attacks are related by specificity: when non-maximally specific arguments are reinstated, fallacious justifications are originated. Particularly, we show how the problem affects DeLP, a system that combines a specificity-based defeat criterion with a reinstatement-based warrant process. Following old intuitions by philosopher Carl Hempel we rethink the concept's role within defeasible argumentation. Two kinds of specificity defeaters are identified: proper defeaters and cautious defeaters. While proper defeaters are well-known, cautious defeaters are formally introduced here. A system combining cautious and proper defeaters is defined as an extension of DeLP, and dialectic warrant games are proposed for filtering out non-maximally specific arguments.Fil: Bodanza, Gustavo Adrian. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Bahía Blanca. Instituto de Investigaciones Económicas y Sociales del Sur. Universidad Nacional del Sur. Departamento de Economía. Instituto de Investigaciones Económicas y Sociales del Sur; ArgentinaFil: Alessio, Claudio Andrés. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Bahía Blanca. Instituto de Investigaciones Económicas y Sociales del Sur; Argentina. Universidad Católica de Cuyo; Argentin

"That Indispensable Figment of the Legal Mind": The Contract of Employment at Common Law in Ontario, 1890-1979

“The relation between an employer and an isolated employee or worker is typically a relation between a bearer of power and one who is not a bearer of power. In its inception it is an act of submission, in its operation it is a condition of subordination, however much the submission and the subordination may be concealed by the indispensable figment of the legal mind known as the 'contract of employment'.” Otto Kahn-Freund , Labour and the Law (London: Stevens, 1977) This study examines the legal evolution of the common law of employment contracts in Ontario between the 1890s and the 1970s. It focuses on the changing relationship between notions of property and contract in employment, as visible through the judicial discourse of reported common law cases. I argue that between the 1890s and the end of the 1970s Ontario saw the emergence and consolidation of two different conceptual paradigms for regulating work at common law. The common law of employment contracts was framed and reframed over different eras of the 20th century through what the courts understood of the nature of the exchange between the parties, the property interests involved and the legal tools necessary to manage that exchange. Contrary to the traditional narrative in the field, the courts of Ontario first conceptualized employment as an exchange as of the turn of the 20th century. This first paradigm emerged in tandem with the province’s second industrial revolution, and sought to regulate the discretionary nature of white collar professional work. The second paradigm was entrenched in the 1960s and 1970s. It is over these years that workers in Standard Employment Relationships (SER) first began to bring employment-related claims to the common law courts, a few decades after it emerged as the paradigmatic form of work around which Ontario’s labour market and employment laws were fashioned over the mid-century. The basic premises of the SER, of long-term employment, job security and internal career advancement, fundamentally changed the psychosical and economic terms of employment. But faced with workers’ claims for recognition of these new terms in law, the courts instead chose to entrench a limited legal framework which denied job security as an enforceable contract term

That Indispensable Figment of the Legal Mind : The Contract of Employment at Common Law in Ontario, 1890-1979

“The relation between an employer and an isolated employee or worker is typically a relation between a bearer of power and one who is not a bearer of power. In its inception it is an act of submission, in its operation it is a condition of subordination, however much the submission and the subordination may be concealed by the indispensable figment of the legal mind known as the \u27contract of employment\u27.” Otto Kahn-Freund , Labour and the Law (London: Stevens, 1977). This study examines the legal evolution of the common law of employment contracts in Ontario between the 1890s and the 1970s. It focuses on the changing relationship between notions of property and contract in employment, as visible through the judicial discourse of reported common law cases. I argue that between the 1890s and the end of the 1970s Ontario saw the emergence and consolidation of two different conceptual paradigms for regulating work at common law. The common law of employment contracts was framed and reframed over different eras of the 20th century through what the courts understood of the nature of the exchange between the parties, the property interests involved and the legal tools necessary to manage that exchange. Contrary to the traditional narrative in the field, the courts of Ontario first conceptualized employment as an exchange as of the turn of the 20th century. This first paradigm emerged in tandem with the province’s second industrial revolution, and sought to regulate the discretionary nature of white collar professional work. The second paradigm was entrenched in the 1960s and 1970s. It is over these years that workers in Standard Employment Relationships (SER) first began to bring employment-related claims to the common law courts, a few decades after it emerged as the paradigmatic form of work around which Ontario’s labour market and employment laws were fashioned over the mid-century. The basic premises of the SER, of long-term employment, job security and internal career advancement, fundamentally changed the psychosical and economic terms of employment. But faced with workers’ claims for recognition of these new terms in law, the courts instead chose to entrench a limited legal framework which denied job security as an enforceable contract term

Readings in Parallel Judiciaries

https://uknowledge.uky.edu/lawfac_book/1005/thumbnail.jp