As a guest user you are not logged in or recognized by your IP address. You have
access to the Front Matter, Abstracts, Author Index, Subject Index and the full
text of Open Access publications.
This paper shows how defeasible argumentation schemes can be used to represent the logical structure of the arguments used in statutory interpretation. In particular we shall address the eleven kinds of argument identified MacCormick and Summers [6] and the thirteen kinds of argument by Tarello [11]. We show that interpretative argumentation has a distinctive structure where the claim that a legal text ought or may be interpreted in a certain way can be supported or attacked by arguments, whose conflicts may have to be assessed according to further arguments.
loading subjects...
