research-article

JusticeBot: A Methodology for Building Augmented Intelligence Tools for Laypeople to Increase Access to Justice

Authors:

Hannes Westermann,

Karim BenyekhlefAuthors Info & Claims

ICAIL '23: Proceedings of the Nineteenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law

Pages 351 - 360

https://doi.org/10.1145/3594536.3595166

Published: 07 September 2023 Publication History

Abstract

Laypeople (i.e. individuals without legal training) may often have trouble resolving their legal problems. In this work, we present the JusticeBot methodology. This methodology can be used to build legal decision support tools, that support laypeople in exploring their legal rights in certain situations, using a hybrid case-based and rule-based reasoning approach. The system ask the user questions regarding their situation and provides them with legal information, references to previous similar cases and possible next steps. This information could potentially help the user resolve their issue, e.g. by settling their case or enforcing their rights in court. We present the methodology for building such tools, which consists of discovering typically applied legal rules from legislation and case law, and encoding previous cases to support the user. We also present an interface to build tools using this methodology and a case study of the first deployed JusticeBot version, focused on landlord-tenant disputes, which has been used by thousands of individuals.

References

[1]

2019. Justice For All - Final Report. Technical Report. The Task Force on Justice, New York: Center on International Cooperation.

[2]

Latifa Al-Abdulkarim, Katie Atkinson, and Trevor Bench-Capon. 2016. A methodology for designing systems to reason with legal cases using abstract dialectical frameworks. Artificial Intelligence and Law 24 (2016), 1--49.

Digital Library

[3]

Benjamin Alarie, Anthony Niblett, and Albert H Yoon. 2016. Using machine learning to predict outcomes in tax law. Can. Bus. LJ 58 (2016), 231.

[4]

Vincent AWMM Aleven. 1997. Teaching case-based argumentation through a model and examples. Citeseer.

[5]

Layman E Allen and C Rudy Engholm. 1977. Normalized legal drafting and the query method. J. Legal Educ. 29 (1977), 380.

[6]

Kevin D Ashley. 1991. Reasoning with cases and hypotheticals in HYPO. International journal of man-machine studies 34, 6 (1991), 753--796.

Digital Library

[7]

Kevin D Ashley. 2017. Artificial intelligence and legal analytics: new tools for law practice in the digital age. Cambridge University Press.

[8]

Kevin D Ashley and Stefanie Brüninghaus. 2009. Automatically classifying case texts and predicting outcomes. Artificial Intelligence and Law 17 (2009), 125--165.

Digital Library

[9]

Esmée A Bickel, Marian AJ van Dijk, and Ellen Giebels. 2015. Online legal advice and conflict support: A Dutch experience. Report, University of Twente (2015).

[10]

Karl Branting, Carlos Balhana, Craig Pfeifer, John S Aberdeen, and Bradford Brown. 2020. Judges Are from Mars, Pro Se Litigants Are from Venus: Predicting Decisions from Lay Text. In JURIX. 215--218.

[11]

L Karl Branting. 2001. Advisory systems for pro se litigants. In Proceedings of the 8th international conference on Artificial intelligence and law. 139--146.

Digital Library

[12]

L Karl Branting, Craig Pfeifer, Bradford Brown, Lisa Ferro, John Aberdeen, Brandy Weiss, Mark Pfaff, and Bill Liao. 2021. Scalable and explainable legal prediction. Artificial Intelligence and Law 29 (2021), 213--238.

Digital Library

[13]

Vannevar Bush et al. 1945. As we may think. The atlantic monthly 176, 1 (1945), 101--108.

[14]

Ab Currie. 2009. The legal problems of everyday life. In Access to justice. Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

[15]

Samuel Dahan, Jonathan Touboul, Jason Lam, and Dan Sfedj. 2020. Predicting employment notice period with machine learning: Promises and limitations. McGill Law Journal 65, 4 (2020), 711--753.

[16]

Trevor CW Farrow, Ab Currie, Nicole Aylwin, Lesley Jacobs, David Northrup, and Lisa Moore. 2016. Everyday legal problems and the cost of justice in Canada: Overview report. Osgoode Legal Studies Research Paper 57 (2016).

[17]

Matthias Grabmair. 2017. Predicting trade secret case outcomes using argument schemes and learned quantitative value effect tradeoffs. In Proceedings of the 16th edition of the International Conference on Articial Intelligence and Law. 89--98.

Digital Library

[18]

Reed C Lawlor. 1963. What computers can do: Analysis and prediction of judicial decisions. American Bar Association Journal (1963), 337--344.

[19]

Joseph CR Licklider. 1960. Man-computer symbiosis. IRE transactions on human factors in electronics 1 (1960), 4--11.

[20]

Julie Macfarlane. 2013. The National Self-Represented Litigants Project: Identifying and Meeting the Needs of Self-Represented Litigants Final Report. (2013).

[21]

Louis-Claude Paquin, François Blanchard, and Claude Thomasset. 1991. Loge-expert: from a legal expert system to an information system for non-lawyers. In ICAIL 1991. 254--259.

Digital Library

[22]

Edwina L Rissland and David B Skalak. 1991. CABARET: rule interpretation in a hybrid architecture. International journal of man-machine studies 34, 6 (1991), 839--887.

Digital Library

[23]

Olivier Salaün, Aurore Troussel, Sylvain Longhais, Hannes Westermann, Philippe Langlais, and Karim Benyekhlef. 2022. Conditional Abstractive Summarization of Court Decisions for Laymen and Insights from Human Evaluation. In Legal Knowledge and Information Systems. IOS Press, 123--132.

[24]

Ken Satoh, Kento Asai, Takamune Kogawa, Masahiro Kubota, Megumi Nakamura, Yoshiaki Nishigai, Kei Shirakawa, and Chiaki Takano. 2010. PROLEG: An Implementation of the Presupposed Ultimate Fact Theory of Japanese Civil Code by PROLOG Technology. In JSAI-isAI Workshops, Vol. 6797. Springer, 153--164.

[25]

Laura Savage and Susan McDonald. 2022. Experiences of serious problems or disputes in the Canadian provinces, 2021. Juristat: Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics (2022), 1--28.

[26]

Noel Semple. 2015. The cost of seeking civil justice in Canada. Can. B. Rev. 93 (2015), 639.

[27]

Marek J. Sergot, Fariba Sadri, Robert A. Kowalski, Frank Kriwaczek, Peter Hammond, and H Terese Cory. 1986. The British Nationality Act as a logic program. Commun. ACM 29, 5 (1986), 370--386.

Digital Library

[28]

Patrick Simard. 2022. Rapport Annuel de Gestion 2021-2022. Technical Report. Tribunal administratif du logement. https://www.tal.gouv.qc.ca/sites/default/files/Rapport_annuel_2021-2022.pdf

[29]

Andrew Stranieri and John Zeleznikow. 1998. The Role of Open Texture and Stare Decisis in Data Mining Discretion. Citeseer.

[30]

Andrew Stranieri, John Zeleznikow, Mark Gawler, and Bryn Lewis. 1999. A Hybrid rule-neural approach for the automation of legal reasoning in the discretionary domain of family law in Australia. AI & L. 7 (1999), 153.

[31]

Richard Susskind. 1987. Expert systems in law. Oxford University Press, Inc.

[32]

Richard Susskind. 2019. Online courts and the future of justice. (2019).

[33]

Darin Thompson. 2015. Creating new pathways to justice using simple artificial intelligence and online dispute resolution. IJODR 2 (2015), 4.

[34]

Vern R Walker. 2006. A default-logic paradigm for legal fact-finding. Jurimetrics 47 (2006), 193.

[35]

Vern R Walker, Nneka Okpara, Ashtyn Hemendinger, and Tauseff Ahmed. 2017. Semantic types for decomposing evidence assessment in decisions on veterans' disability claims for PTSD. (2017).

[36]

DA Waterman and MA Peterson. 1981. Models of legal decision-making, R-2717-ICJ.

[37]

Hannes Westermann, Jaromir Savelka, and Karim Benyekhlef. 2021. Paragraph similarity scoring and fine-tuned BERT for legal information retrieval and entailment. In New Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence: JSAI-isAI 2020 Workshops. Springer, 269--285.

Digital Library

[38]

Hannes Westermann, Jaromir Savelka, Vern R Walker, Kevin D Ashley, and Karim Benyekhlef. 2020. Sentence embeddings and high-speed similarity search for fast computer assisted annotation of legal documents. In Legal Knowledge and Information Systems: JURIX 2020, Brno, Vol. 334. IOS Press, 164.

[39]

Hannes Westermann, Vern R Walker, Kevin D Ashley, and Karim Benyekhlef. 2019. Using factors to predict and analyze landlord-tenant decisions to increase access to justice. In ICAIL 2019. 133--142.

Digital Library

[40]

Yifei Yin, Farhana Zulkernine, and Samuel Dahan. 2020. Determining Worker Type from Legal Text Data using Machine Learning. In DASC/PiCom/CBDCom/CyberSciTech 2020. IEEE, 444--450.

[41]

John Zeleznikow. 2002. Using web-based legal decision support systems to improve access to justice. Information & Communications Technology Law 11, 1 (2002), 15--33.

[42]

John Zeleznikow. 2016. Can artificial intelligence and online dispute resolution enhance efficiency and effectiveness in courts. In IJCA, Vol. 8. HeinOnline, 30.

Cited By

Bex F(2024)AI, Law and beyond. A transdisciplinary ecosystem for the future of AI & LawArtificial Intelligence and Law10.1007/s10506-024-09404-yOnline publication date: 16-May-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-024-09404-y
Mulcahy LTsalapatanis AMulcahy LTsalapatanis A(2024)What Is Gained When Justice Moves Online?Digital Justice10.1007/978-3-031-65265-3_3(37-52)Online publication date: 28-Aug-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-65265-3_3
Sastre AIglesias AMorato JSanchez-Cuadrado S(2024)Is ChatGPT Able to Generate Texts that Are Easy to Understand and Read?Good Practices and New Perspectives in Information Systems and Technologies10.1007/978-3-031-60221-4_14(138-147)Online publication date: 13-May-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-60221-4_14

Index Terms

JusticeBot: A Methodology for Building Augmented Intelligence Tools for Laypeople to Increase Access to Justice

Recommendations

Use of Web Conferences in Arbitration Courts of the Russian Federation: Issues of Legal Regulation
DEFIN-2021: IV International Scientific and Practical Conference

The initiation of restrictive measures throughout the Russian Federation in order to prevent the spread of COVID-19, as well as the inability of courts to function as usual, demonstrated a high need to improve judicial activity in terms of the use of ...
Judicial Virtual Desk Service: Brazil's Approach to Broadening Access to Justice
ICEGOV '24: Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance

Access to justice summarises other fundamental values and guarantees comprising different aspects. In Administration of Justice studies, access can be understood as access to judicial services and information. Judicial Desk Services (JDS) play a crucial ...
RePresent: Enabling Access to Justice for Pro Se Litigants via Co-Authored Serious Games
DIS '24: Proceedings of the 2024 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference

Increasing numbers of people represent themselves in legal disputes—known as pro se litigants. Many lack the skills, experience, or knowledge to navigate legal proceedings without a lawyer, resulting in limited access to justice. Serious games may ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Other conferences

ICAIL '23: Proceedings of the Nineteenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law

June 2023

499 pages

ISBN:9798400701979

DOI:10.1145/3594536

Conference Chair:
Francisco Andrade
University of Minho, Portugal
,
Program Chair:
Matthias Grabmair
Technical University of Munich, Germany

Copyright © 2023 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

Sponsors

IAAIL: Intl Asso for Artifical Intel & Law

In-Cooperation

UMinho: University of Minho
SIGAI: ACM Special Interest Group on Artificial Intelligence
AAAI: Am Assoc for Artifical Intelligence

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 07 September 2023

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article
Research
Refereed limited

Conference

ICAIL 2023

Sponsor:

IAAIL

ICAIL 2023: Nineteenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law

June 19 - 23, 2023

Braga, Portugal

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 69 of 169 submissions, 41%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

2
Total Citations
View Citations
139
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)89
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)6

Reflects downloads up to 30 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Bex F(2024)AI, Law and beyond. A transdisciplinary ecosystem for the future of AI & LawArtificial Intelligence and Law10.1007/s10506-024-09404-yOnline publication date: 16-May-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-024-09404-y
Mulcahy LTsalapatanis AMulcahy LTsalapatanis A(2024)What Is Gained When Justice Moves Online?Digital Justice10.1007/978-3-031-65265-3_3(37-52)Online publication date: 28-Aug-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-65265-3_3
Sastre AIglesias AMorato JSanchez-Cuadrado S(2024)Is ChatGPT Able to Generate Texts that Are Easy to Understand and Read?Good Practices and New Perspectives in Information Systems and Technologies10.1007/978-3-031-60221-4_14(138-147)Online publication date: 13-May-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-60221-4_14

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Figures

Tables

Media

View Table of Conten