|
HOME
PREVIOUS PAGE
NEXT PAGE
PART III: INTERNATIONAL
SURVEY OF LEGAL INFORMATION RETRIEVAL
[Page 247 ]
6 A BRIEF HISTORY OF COMPUTERIZED LEGAL INFORMATION
RETRIEVAL
6.1 Introduction
Computers have now been used in legal information systems for more
than 20 years. This may be too short a time to justify the use of a
dignified word like "history". But these years have been hectic; a
number of projects have been launched, a number of systems have been
created. The literature makes frequent references to systems or
projects, but it is often difficult to relate these to each other. To
most people, the picture of the development remains an unsolved
puzzle.
We have ourselves faced this difficulty in our attempt to sketch a
coherent, although simplified, picture of the development. We have had
the opportunity to draw on a great number of sources, but the
documentation is still unsatisfactory. For one thing, Norway has been
rather remote from the center of activities - although the Norwegian
Research Center for Computers and Law, founded in 1970, maintains
close contacts with persons or institutions in a number of countries.
Also, documentation often comes in the form of informal reports,
conference papers, etc, which are not readily available.
For these reasons there may be lacunae in our expose, but we still
think it may serve a useful function with respect to the more general
discussions in this book. It may also serve as some sort of
explanation of all the acronyms used as names on projects or systems,
which may be unfamiliar to the reader.
Actually it is difficult to distinguish between projects and
systems. In some cases, a general text retrieval program is available
from a software vendor, and this program is used in a number of
systems - like the IBM program STAIRS (used by, for instance,
PORODASEN in Brazil, CEDIJ in France, Camera dei deputati in Italy,
DATEV in Germany and DC-jura in Denmark), the British STATUS
program (used by, for
[Page 249 ]
instance, Kluwer in Holland, EUROLEX in England, in applications
in Australia and as the basis of programs in Norway), the French
MISTRAL (used, for instance, by the Common Market system CELEX), etc.
In other cases, the project is simultaneously concerned with
developing programs and a legal information service, like LEXIS,
WESTLAW, the Responsa Project and others.
This chapter is based on Bing/Harvold 1977:57-74. We
shall here review mainly the general background and the first
initiatives, while in the country-by-country discussions of chapter 7
we shall review national operative services and their context. This
scheme will cause some overlapping, but nevertheless we think that a
general and overall introduction may be appropriate.
[Page 250 ]
6.2 Background
6.2.1 Libraries and indexes
Computerized legal information services correspond to traditional
systems for facilitating legal research. Lawyers have traditional
tools to assist them, the most important being, of course, the law
library. The law librarian has a number of methods for finding the
material requested by the user, for instance catalogues organized
systematically or alphabetically (according to author, title, indexing
terms, etc).
The accumulation of volumes in American law libraries seems to have
increased drastically around 1930 (Allen/Brooks/James 1962:22, Lawlor
1962:300-305). When the application of computers to administrative
systems became a realistic alternative, computerbased library systems
were created (cfr Hayes/Becker 1970), and were also as a matter of
course considered for law libraries (cfr for instance
Allen/Brooks/James 1962:23-81, Veaner 1971).
The problems of library systems are not, however, identical with
the problems of interest retrieval systems. A library may use a
computerized system for the administration of their collection of
books: which books are lent, to whom, etc. Also, search requests will
often be formulated in such a way that fact retrieval - not
interest retrieval - will be the adequate response: do you have
a book by this author, or a book with this title and so on.
The catalogues and indexes of a library will, however, often be
used for interest retrieval. A search request must therefore be
formulated to correspond with the search mechanism available in the
catalogue or index: a systematic number, the name of an author, an
indexing term, etc. An obvious step would be to convert the manual
catalogues and indexes into an automatic system.
Actually, special indexes have been developed to satisfy the need
of the lawyer. Most legal publications (for compilations of statutes
and law reporters) have extensive and well-developed indexes. Such
indexes may in fact be publications in their own right, covering for
instance the decisions of a
[Page 251 ]
certain court over a certain period of time, as a digest, etc.
In Norway, which is certainly not too well developed in this
respect, there has, for instance, been published an index of all
statutes cited in cases published in the major law reports.
In the US, where case law plays a more important role in the legal
system, a number of indexes, digests, etc have been developed which
aid the lawyer in his search for precedents. The major example is the
Key Classification System developed by West Publishing Co. This system
includes 420 subjects, which have their own term and key. Each subject
is in turn divided into parts and numbers. The subject "Contract" is
for instance divided into 6 parts and 356 Key Numbers.
An example given by Lando (1968:175-176): Under the
subject "Contracts", Part II "Construction & Operation", and the Key
Number 144 "What Law Governs" several cases are cited, one example is:
"N.Y. Under 'center of gravity' or 'grouping of
contracts' theory of Conflict of Laws, the court lays emphasis on law
of place which has most significant contracts with matter in dispute
rather than place of making or performing the contract thereby giving
place having most interest in the problem paramount control over legal
issues arising, Auten v Auten 194 N.E. 2nd 99, 308 N.Y. 155."
The source itself (the case cited) must be consulted if
the user wants to control the interpretation in the digest, or make
use of the case itself - the digest serves only the retrieval and
relevance functions, the source function has to be solved by the
original case reporter.
One might have thought that indexes like the Key Classification
System would have been transformed into computerized systems. Within
other fields, we have seen such developments - for instance that of
the Index Medicus into MEDLARS and MEDLINE (cfr for instance
Fagerheim 1972).
[Page 252 ]
Circumstances did, however, pick another point of departure.
It may be a source of some curiosity that the history of
computers is indebted to law. The US presidential elections every
fourth year calls for the votes to be distributed on districts
according to the population. This presumes an up-to-date population
statistic, and at the end of the last century, the time required to
process the data from the census endangered the concordance between
politics and law. In competition with two non-mechanical systems, the
electric data tabulation system of Herman Hollerith was adopted for
the 1890 Census. In 1896 Hollerith formed his own company, the
Tabulating Machine Company, which was sold in 1911 and shortly
afterwards merged with two other companies to become the
Computing-Tabulating-Recording Company. This company was under
direction of Thomas J Watson since 1914, and was renamed the
International Business Machine Corporation in 1924. In this way, IBM
does indeed owe its very existence to law.
6.2.2 Jurimetrics
The word jurimetrics was invented by Lee Loevinger in his
now classical paper "Jurimetrics - The Next Step Forward", a term he
defines as "the scientific investigation of legal problems" (1949:31).
In his survey of the problems of Jurimetrics (1949:32-36) he mainly
advocated an empirical approach to legal problems - and many of these
problems are today included in the sociology of law (for instance the
behavior of judges).
Loevinger's paper does, however, serve as an exponent of the
interest which lawyers were beginning to take in logic and law. This
interest is not of a recent date. George Boole, the inventor of
Boolean logic (which is basic of most text retrieval systems) used a
problem in Jewish dietary law as a simple example in his An
Investigation of the Laws of Thought (1854), and the problems of
logic and law have been discussed in legal philosophy (cfr the
historical survey and discussion in Sundby 1974:50-76). The use
[Page 253 ]
of computers, which demands a high degree of discipline and logic
from programmers, did, however, in one sense give "the problems of
logic and law a new dimension: deontic logic may in fact be translated
into computer programs, and the possibility of constructing true
decision-automatas ("deontic machines") was created. A number of
papers discussing the application of modern logic to law was published
(cfr the survey of Lawlor 1962:305-310). Especially important for the
later development were the papers published by Layman E Allen,
commencing with his paper in Yale Law Journal (1957) "Symbolic
logic: A razor-edged tool for drafting and interpreting legal
documents". In 1959 Allen started editing the magazine named MULL
(Modern Uses of Logic in Law), which was published by the
Electronic Data Retrieval Committee established by the American Bar
Association in the same year, now the Standing Committee on Law and
Technology. This journal was dedicated to papers discussing the
application of the scientific method to law, and has played an
important role in the creating of an interest for computers and law
(cfr Tapper 1963:132). MULL is still published under the title
Jurimetrics Journal.
With respect to the development of computerized retrieval systems,
the development briefly sketched above has only limited interest. But
we believe it was important in the way the attention of lawyers was
turned toward "the application of the scientific method to law". One
of the exciting, new tools which science offered the post-war society
was the electronic computer. And the application of the computer to
law was motivated largely by the work of Allen, Loevinger, and Lawlor.
However, the computer was not put to use as a "deontic machine" in the
first place, but rather as a research tool - a distinction we have
stressed earlier.
It should, however, be remembered that the tradition
discussed above is still very much part of computers and law, and does
indeed seem to have gained importance during the last years. The
milestone was perhaps represented by the Swansea Workshop for Computer
Science and Law, organized by professor Bryan Niblett 17th - 27th
September 1979 at University College, Swansea (cfr the proceedings
published as Niblett 1980). This was followed by the Florence
conference "Logica,
[Page 254 ]
Informatica, Diritto" 6th - 10th April, 1981, organized
by the Istituto per la documentazione giurdica, Florence -
preproceedings published as Ciampi/Maretti/Martino 1981, proceedings
as Ciampi 1982 and Martino 1982. The last conference in this chain was
organized by Institut fuer Datenverarbeitung im Rechtswesen at the
Gesellschaft fuer Mathematik und Datenverarbeitung near Bonn. Its
proceedings (autumn 1983) are currently under publication. It may be
worth noting that the founder of the Jurimetrics Journal,
professor Layman Allen, is still very active and innovative within the
work on deontic systems.
The first modern, electronic computer - ENIAC - became operational
in the summer of 1946. The same year Lewis O Kelso pointed out in a
paper published by Rocky Mountain Law Review with the rethoric
title "Does the law need a technical revolution?" (cited after Lawlor
1962:310):
"Today the lawyer works substantially as he worked before
the industrial revolution. Only automated legal research will save him
from playing one of the confused, ill-paid and unsatisfactory
professions in the world of tomorrow."
Kelso's proposal is believed to be the earliest suggestion for
creating automatic retrieval systems to assist legal research. His
suggestion was stimulated by the work of dr Vannevar Bush, who had
advocated mechanical searching methods in scientific fields, and Kelso
suggested a "Law-dex"-system based on the use of punched cards.
Another suggestion was made in 1955 by Vincent P Biunno of the New
Jersey Law Institute (Lawlor 1962:311). He proposed to enter legal
information on a tape which was to be moving continously past a number
of read-out stations. The information might then be retrieved by
different lawyers more or less at the same time.
These examples are not mere curiosities, they illustrate the fact
that lawyers at that time were looking for new ways to ease the
workload represented by legal research. This interest - and the need
that created it - would fuse with some of the ideas generated by
Jurimetrics: the first computerized legal
[Page 255 ]
information retrieval working on natural language documents and
allowing search requests to be formulated in Boolean logic.
An early description of a computerized on-line
information system is given in the short-story "How-2" by the US
science fiction writer Clifford D Simak. The story, which was
published in Galaxy 1954, tells of a lawyer who one morning
discovers a box with a do-it-yourself kit inside. Following the
instructions, he builds himself a robot - which happens to be
mis-delivered from the future. The following mixup sends the lawyer
before the court. But his friendly robot spends the night before the
trial building a new robot - a lawyer robot.
"'(A lawyer robot) with a far greater memory capacity
than any of the others and with a brain-computer that operates on
logic. That's what law is, isn't it - logic?'
'I suppose it is,' said Lee. 'At least it's supposed to
be ... It just wouldn't work. To practise law, you must be admitted to
the bar. To be admitted to the bar, you must have a degree in law and
pass an examination and, although there's never been an occation to
establish a precedent, I suspect the applicant must be human ...'
'All they'd need to do would be to read the books,' said
Albert. 'Ten seconds to a page or so. Everything they read would be
stored in their memory cells.'
Lee scrubbed his chin with a knotted fist and the light
of speculation was growing in his eyes. 'It might be worth a try. If
it works, though, it'll be an evil day for jurisprudence.'"
Whether Lee's last words are prophetic or not remains to
be seen. But the American Bar Association has looked into the question
of when the computer enters into unauthorized practice, and optical
character readers actually scan pages in a speed comparable with the
lawyer robot's ...
[Page 256 ]
6.3 The initiative
6.3.1 The Pittsburgh Project
The University of Pittsburgh started developing a Data Processing
and Computing Center in 1955. In the course of four years, systems for
information retrieval had become an integral part of the Center, which
at that time had changed from an IBM 650 to an IBM 7070 and a
supplementary IBM 1401 (Asher/Kurfeerst 1963:4).
At approximately the same time, professor John F Horty and William
B Kehl started a project in the Graduate School of Public Health,
designed to study and improve the health statutes of Pennsylvania
(Asher/Kurfeerst 1963:4). In 1956 the Health Law Center under
direction of Horty undertook the writing of a manual on the subject of
hospital law. They looked at material from several states, and found
that there was little uniformity in indexing from state to state.
Therefore special indexes had to be developed. Problems increased as
the project moved into wider areas of health law, and the project
looked to the Computing Center of the university for a solution
(Loevinger 1963:10).
A special assignment proved to be a kind of a turning point. A
state legislator in Pennsylvania had a bill passed to change the
expression "retarded child" to the slightly less stigmatic
"exceptional child". In order to implement the bill, all locations
where the phrase occurred had to be identified.
This type of statutory revision is trivial, but
nevertheless time consuming and fairly typical. Recent examples from
Norway are the change of the title for "lawyer" ("sakf&rer" into
"advokat") and for "local social security office" ("trygdekasse" into
"trygdekontor"). Examples are probably abundant within any
jurisdiction. Cfr Lovteknikk 1971:16.
The Health Law Center started out to solve this problem in the
traditional way; they paid a group of students to read through the
statutes and regulations, and make a note of all occurences of the
relevant phrases. It turned out that the inaccuracy was too
[Page 257 ]
high to be acceptable - and another group of students was hired
to reread the material. Still there were errors.
A more radical method was then adopted. The entire material was
registered on punch cards and verified by doublepunch. When a machine
readable copy of the material was established, it became quite a
trivial task for the computer to read through the material and
retrieve all occurrences where the word "retarded" proceeded the word
"child" or variations of "child" (Link 1973:6-7).
The result was not only a satisfactory solution to the original
assignment. As a by-product, the Health Law Center got the full text
of the statutes in machine-readable form. And Horty found other and
more exciting ways of exploiting his material. Actually it was the
beginning of the text retrieval systems which today are predominant in
computerized legal information retrieval.
One may note that this first example is not an example of
interest retrieval, which text retrieval systems mainly are
used for today, but of fact retrieval. The original assignment
of Horty was to find certain words, not certain ideas.
But as there are such a close relationship between words and the ideas
they express, and as the authentic text of the statutes and
regulations were required, the leap to the more complex interest
research was, perhaps, not too long.
Horty was not the only person at this time with an interest in
computer applications to legal research. For instance, conventional
book indexes were converted into machine-readable form (Link 1973:7),
and twenty years of headnotes of design patent cases had been stored
on the magnetic discs of an IBM RAMRAC 305 for retrieval purposes in
an experiment carried out by Donal A Andrews, who at that time was
director of research and development of the United States Patent
Office (Lawlor 1962:313, Tapper 1963:133). Other projects are briefly
mentioned by Loevinger 1963:13-21.
The text retrieval approach did, however, lead to some advantages
for legal research - one being the appeal to lawyers to conduct their
retrieval against
[Page 258 ]
the sources themselves instead of against an index or an
abstract. At this time, the relative performance of different methods
was not very well known, but there was a general attitude of optimism
in regard to the text retrieval approach, a hope that the potential of
this method might be higher than the index or abstract approach.
We also think that the retrieval strategies developed by Horty in
order to overcome the specificity of the authentic text may, to some
degree, have caused this attitude. Horty suggested that questions
should be split into "concepts", and that each "concept" should be
described by a list of search terms. (Cfr examples in Horty 1960:3-5,
Lawlor 1962:315-320, Loevinger 1963:11-13.) This strategy does have
some important traits in common with the conceptor-based retrieval
strategy developed and recommended by the Norwegian Research Center
for Computers and Law.
Loevinger (1963:11-12) discusses an example in which a
search request is constructed for the question, "What are the rights
of illegitimate children and the duties owed to them by their parents
under Pennsylvanian Statutes?" This question is split into three
"concepts", the first being 'baby', the second 'parent' and the third
'illegitimate'. Loevinger lists the search terms used to describe each
of these "concepts". For 'baby' he lists:
baby
babies
child
children
foundling
infant
minor
offspring
All these search terms may be used in the search request
combined with the Boolean operator or, and the three lists of
search terms (where all terms in a list are combined with or)
are combined with the Boolean operator and. Documents which
contain at least one term from each of the three lists, are retrieved.
It may be noticed that the words occurring in one
[Page 259 ]
list are synonyms - but only in the context of the
question. As words representing 'parent', Loevinger for instance lists
both "mother" and "father", two words which in another context (for
instance in a discussion on sex roles) certainly will not be synonyms.
Such words, which may be considered equivalent for search purposes,
have been termed searchonyms by Richard PC Hayden (cfr Lawlor
1962:318), but we shall adhere to the less elegant term "context
dependent synonyms".
The batch oriented system for storage and retrieval of statutes was
named the "Key Word in Combination"-approach by Horty (Loevinger
1963:12). The acronym KWIC, however, generally denotes a "key words in
context"-listing, first developed by HP Luhn of IBM.
Horty's system was successfully demonstrated at an American Bar
Association conference in 1960.
6.3.2 The Aspen Systems Corporation
The system developed at the Health Law Center was in 1968 made into
the nucleus of a private company, Automated Law Searching - later
renamed Aspen Systems Corporation (Aitken/Campbell/Morgan 1972:31,
Prestel 1971:19). Aspen rapidly expanded and diversified its
activities, it coverted into machine readable form the United States
Code and the statutes of all states, in addition to regulatory law,
local ordinances, case law, etc.
Among the services offered by Aspen was also a bill-drafting
service (QUIK-DRAFT), bound KWIC-indexes, production of compilations
of statutes in force in a printed form, etc. Aspen acquired as a
subsidiary the Computype Corporation (St Paul, Minnesota) in order to
utilize the machine readable material for photocomposition and
typesetting (Tapper 1970:22-23).
The first to have emphasized the close relationship
between a legal retrieval system and a system for printing legal
material, seems to have been professor John Lyons of George Washington
University. In 1966 he founded Autocomp Inc mainly to
[Page 260 ]
develop and combine text retrieval and photocomposition
techniques. (Cfr Prestel 1971:21, Tapper 1973:186-188.) A brief
description is given by Lyons 1969:60-63.
Aspen started as a corporation with a special know-how of text
retrieval techniques, acquired through the early experiments at
Pittsburgh University. Other systems were launched by Aspen, for
instance LITE (or FLITE, as it is known today), and Aspen also lent a
hand in the development of integrated retrieval and publishing
systems. By 1970 Aspen was providing various legal information
services to 20 states, in addition to serving a number of public
agencies and private corporations, cfr Tapper 1973:89. The
terminal-oriented text retrieval systems developed during the last
part of the 1960ies seem to have reduced the importance of Aspen's
services - but there was still a market for publishing legal material,
especially annotated statutes or codes.
In the early 1970ies, Aspen was acquired as a subsidiary of
American Can Co, and Horty left Aspen and returned to private practice
(Aitken/Campbell/Morgan 1972:31). It has later been reported that
Aspen has been sold to foreign interests.
Horty's early experiments resulted in a decade of activity and
exploration. It is rather fitting that this epoch should end with the
divorce of Aspen and Horty.
6.3.3 The Oxford Experiments
The results published by the Pittsburgh Project had a stimulating
effect not only on lawyers in the United States, but also overseas.
Starting from the results published by Horty, the English lawyer Col
in Tapper (currently All Souls Reader of Law and Fellow of Magdalene
College at Oxford University - associated with the London School of
Economics and Political Science) entered upon his series of
experiments with case law retrieval - which has become known as the
Oxford Experiments (cfr Tapper 1973:176-182 for his own summary of
these experiments, and Haft 1970:143-144).
[Page 261 ]
The experiments focused on retrieval problems in respect to case
law. Horty's early work had been restricted mainly to statutory
material, and there are some distinct differences in legislative and
judicial texts which do cause somewhat different problems. For
instance the language of case law is more redundant and more specific,
the obvious document unit (one decision) is not as semantically
homogenous as the obvious document unit of statutes (one section) etc.
The value of Tapper's experiments are twofold: Firstly, the results
he arrived at are of importance in themselves. Secondly - and in
retrospect more important - is the attitude which Tapper brought into
the field, namely that of a critical and scientific inquirer examining
the basic problems of designing reliable tests for information system
performance.
His dismissal of using manually compiled indexes may
serve as an example: When creating the indexes, sampling proved that
the inconsistency both between different indexers indexing the same
decision and the same indexer indexing the same decision at
different times and in different contexts was too great to give an
appropriate basis for performance tests - cfr Tapper 1973:121. Another
example is the question on what basis the comparison should be made.
The data base of a computerized system may be specified precisely,
while this is seldom so in respect to a conventional user situation
(cfr above at sect 3.5.3 (2)). If the manual search is restricted to
the legal sources made available through the computerized system, the
character of the conventional search is completely altered - and the
comparison will be of a correspondingly reduced value. Cfr Tapper
1973:169-170.
The Oxford experiment situation was complicated by the practical
problems posed by text processing in relation to the computer
equipment available in the early sixties. The main objectives of
Tapper's experiments were to compare the performance of computerized
and manual retrieval, and system performance using authentic text and
abstracts.
Considering the average recall and precision of all the questions
in the experiment, Tapper found that of a total of 175 relevant
documents, 100 (49 per cent)
[Page 262 ]
were retrieved by conventional methods, while 144 (70 per cent)
were retrieved by the computer. On the other hand, by conventional
methods altogether 109 documents were retrieved, of which 100 were
relevant (92 per cent), while 496 documents were retrieved by the
computer, of which 144 (29 per cent) were relevant. (Cfr Tapper
1973:179-182 for comments and analysis of the results.)
One of the problems of estimating performance is the
establishment of which documents are relevant. In his experiment,
Tapper was able to establish relevance criteria completely independent
of the experimental environment by using citations - for instance: a
question framed on the basis of decision A. Then both decision A and
decisions citing A or cited by A will be relevant in respect of the
question.
It should be noted that Tapper is still very much active within the
field of computers and law. In the beginning of the 1970ies he carried
out some valuable surveys for the Committee of Legal Data Processing
of the Council of Europe, which facilitated for European organizations
the sharing of experiences made in the US. He has published several
books on computers and law, and his Computer Law, concentrating
on substantive law, is an acknowledged standard survey of the area.
Also, he has continued his experiments working on the possibilities of
using citation vectors for retrieval of case law, an experiment partly
carried out in cooperation with the Norwegian Research Center for
Computers and Law - cfr Tapper (1982).
[Page 263 ]
6.4 A profusion of projects
6.4.1 Introduction
In the previous sections, a few outlines have been sketched,
suggesting how legal information systems were initiated and developed.
These outlines do not, however, describe in detail the profusion of
projects which followed in the tracks of Horty and other pioneers of
the 1950ies.
Tapper reports (in 1963:132) 28 different concurrent projects in
the field of legal information systems. A survey of the World Peace
Through Law Center in 1966 lists about 40 projects, cfr Presten
1971:17. Several US universities initiated projects within the field
of legal informatics - for instance the George Washington University
(professor John Lyons), the Western Reserve University, and Stanford
University. (In the early 1970ies Stanford had a Law and Computer
Fellowship under the Computer Study and Research Program, later
discontinued, but in which prominent persons like Colin Tapper, Susan
Nycum and L Thorne McCarty took part). In 1967, the Third World
Conference on World Peace Through Law was organized in Geneva,
featuring an exhibition on computers and law, and with sessions on
legal information retrieval. The World Peace Through Law Center
reported on this conference in its first issue 06 the journal Law
and Computer Technology (January 1968) - a welcome addition to
Jurimetrics Journal (now retitled Law and Technology. In
1970 a third US journal appeared, Rutgers Journal of Computers and
Law, published by Rutgers University, New York - later retitled
Rutgers Journal of Law and Technology. (For a current review of
US journals, cfr below on the national section.)
We shall not, in this book, attempt to give an adequate
presentation of the development in the United States, as the subject
is evidently too diversified to be compressed into a few paragraphs.
Also, a discussion of these projects would presume a somewhat broader
perspective than the one adopted in this book. Legal computer
applications include much more than legal information retrieval - for
instance legislative information systems (which will only be grazed in
passing), administrative systems for courts
[Page 264 ]
and the the criminal justice systems, litigation support systems,
law enforcement systems, systems for land registers, deontic systems,
etc - not to mention systems for word processing, document
construction and office administration developed for the lawyer. We
will confine ourselves to highlighting a few examples which we find of
interest in respect to the main theme of our book.
6.4.2 Law Research Services, Incorporated
In 1960 a New York lawyer, Elias Hoppenfeld, with some background
in computer applications, began planning a computerized legal
retrieval system. In spite of the successful results which Horty had
obtained with text retrieval systems, Hoppenfeld opted for an indexing
system. This was probably due partly to the fact that while Horty's
initial efforts were oriented towards legislation, Hoppenfeld was
oriented towards the far more bulky case law.
Law Research Services was founded by Hoppenfeld in 1963, and it was
very much a one-man business. The retrieval system became operative in
February 1964 - probably the first commercial computerized legal
retrieval service to be launced. In March 1965 shares in the company
were offered to the general public, and all stock was sold out in a
few days.
The data base of LRS was cases represented by a set of manually
selected indexing terms. The user filled in a preprinted form, writing
down his question in his own words. This question was then forwarded
to LRS, where an editor (with a background knowledge of the relevant
field of law) formulated the search request. Next, the search request
was processed and citations to the retrieved cases printed out. The
list was then edited before returned to the user - the editor
indicating which three cases he thought to be most pertinent to the
user's question (a sort of manual ranking). The authentic text of the
cases was provided in microform - and the user could get the authentic
text of the other cases on request.
The initial scheme was based on a strong interaction within the LRS
between lawyers and the computer
[Page 265 ]
system. The computerized system did all the routine work, while
the expertise of lawyers was used to refine both the search request
and the final response. A similar approach was adopted by several of
the early systems, for instance the Belgian CREDOC and the Canadian
DATUM.
In order to establish a closer contact between the user and the
LRS, direct access was provided through rented teletype terminals.
When the pre-editing stage was eliminated, the user had to be provided
with the means of formulating his search request by using the indexing
terms adopted by LRS. In order to faciliate this, several manual
indexes were produced.
The initial cost for using the system was 23 dollars per question.
When terminals were introduced, the cost was cut down to 10 dollars
per question, a line charge of 2 dollars, and a monthly rent of 18
dollars, cfr Tapper 1973:185 and Haft 1970:169 at note 711. It is
reported that the majority of law firms in the state of New York at
one time were subscribers to LRS (Tapper 1973:185); in 1964 there were
more than 5.000 clients throughout the country (Seipel 1970:726), and
plans for expansion to other states were considered.
LRS did, however, meet severe difficulties. Computer facilities
were originally provided by Sperry Rand (Univac III), but the
relationship between Sperry Rand and LRS was marred by financial
difficulties (2 CLSR 309 at page 313-315). Arrangements were made with
Western Union Telegraph Company (1963-1966) to create and maintain a
data base and provide telecommunication facilities, cfr Seipel
1970:326. But also this relationship was marred by misunderstandings,
cfr 1 CLRS 1002 (Law Research Services Inc v Western Union Tel Co, 27
May 1968) and 3 CLRS 161 (Law Research Services of Missouri, Inc v
Western Union Tel Co, 7 December 1971, cfr 336 F Suppl 510).
The difficulties, as reported in 1 CLRS 1002, partly
arose out of a misunderstanding concerning the use of an algorithm for
generating octal digits employed when addressing the fastrand drums,
and as index numbers for the the citation data in LRS' thesauri.
Neither were the billing tapes as required by LRS.
[Page 266 ]
And more trouble was ahead. A suit was brought against LRS, based
on the claim that information offered by LRS at the time when public
shares were issued, had been misleading. In fact the old trouble with
Sperry Rand was at the back of this matter, as the disagreement with
Sperry Rand had been understated in the information to prospective
shareholders, cfr 2 CLRS 309 (Morton Globus et al v Law Research
Services Inc and Blair & Co v Paul Wiener, 2 July 1968).
Lastly, West Publishing Company brought a suit in June 1966
alleging that LRS had copied certain of the West Key Number digest
indexes for their computerized retrieval system, thereby infringing
various West copyrights, cfr Duncan/Peck 1972:99 and 2 CLRS 984 at
page 985. A settlement was reached during LRS bankruptcy proceedings,
in which all claims were dismissed, and it was stipulated that all the
material claimed by LRS to represent copyright infringement should be
destroyed - including the data base itself. It should be stressed that
LRS did not admit any copyright infringement, and that this claim was
also dismissed as part of the settlement. Furthermore the settlement
stipulated that West
"... shall not create and offer for sale to the Bar or to
the public a computerized system for legal research identical to or
substantially identical to ..."
the LRS system documented during the proceedings. West was not
barred, however, from creating an independent computerized system for
legal research
"... without using any confidential information obtained
from the documents or depositions ..."
made available to West during the proceedings. Cfr 3 CLRS 561 (West
Publishing Co v Law Research Services Inc, 25 May 1972).
A related case is Computer Searching Services Corp v
Ryan, 2 CLRS 984, 2 March 1971. This is an action taken by West
against a subsidiary owned by LRS itself. West claimed that CSSC was
"threatening to take over the infringing acts" of LRS.
In spite of the misfortunes descending on the first
[Page 267 ]
commercial venture in this field, rumors told for several years
of LRS moving once more into the market, cfr for instance 1974:23. And
one may speculate if the conflict with West did have any influence on
this company's own policy in respect to computerized services - which
was launched in the mid-1970ies under the name WESTLAW.
6.4.3 RIRA: Reports and Information Retrieval Activity
RIRA did in fact originate within the Internal Revenue Service in
1962, and the departure point was represented by the need for a
systematic coordination of the decisions made by lawyers within the
IRS. The Office of Chief Council of IRS employed about 650 lawyers
(Cohen/Uretz 1968:2), more than half of these were stationed at 35
field offices throughout the country. A number of statutes are
administrated by this organization; attorneys of the IRS have for
instance exclusive jurisdiction in the preparation and trial cases
filed with the Tax Court.
Tax law is of a rather special nature. In most countries - even
where the legal system depends heavily upon case law - the tax law is
codified, and tax can usually be levied only under the direct
authority of a statute. Also, tax law cases may be rather intricate;
as Tapper (1973:201) has put it, one tries to
"... exploit quite deliberately any inconsistencies,
ambiguities or loopholes. Thus litigation is heavily concentrated on
fringe situations. Large sums of money are usually involved, so the
very greatest legal ingenuity can be purchased on both sides ..."
In addition, decisions made by the tax administration should meet
the standards raised by the principle of equality, a challenge which
confronts any public administration. As Cohen/Uretz (1968:3) point
out, the IRS
"... cannot be concerned simply with taking the position
which gives the best chance of winning the particular case. One of the
major objectives of the Service in administrating the tax law is
[Page 268 ]
uniformity and consistency of treatment among similarily
situated taxpayers".
We think this is an important observation, and it characterizes a
typical difference in the information needs of a public agency and the
private practising lawyer. This difference may indeed be one of
principle, corresponding to a difference in the standards to be met by
legal information systems inside and outside the administration.
The RIRA system was designed to solve the coordination problems
between the separate offices and lawyers of IRS. The data base
consisted not only of legal precedents (closed cases), but also of
pending cases. It is not known how many cases was included in
the RIRA data base at any given time, but it is stated that about
14.000 pending cases were entered into the system (Cohen/Uretz 1968:3,
Duncan/Peck 1972:26).
Documents were stored as a set of indexing terms. Before the
introduction of RIRA, there existed no standard terminology adequately
describing the legal problems of a case. A thesaurus was developed,
called the Uniform Issue List. This is largely based upon the Internal
Revenue Code, and we see that the intimate relationship between the
code and the legal problems characteristic of tax law has been
exploited in designing a relatively simple, but quite unambigious and
adequate indexing language. Also, the indexing terms will be easy to
use for lawyers who are familiar with the code. Empirical studies seem
to bear out that this type of indexing language based on statutory
citations performs remarkable well, cfr Bing 1982b:221-228.
The final index consisted of some 6.000 separate subjects, and was
produced in two formats: the Uniform Issue List and a KWIC-format of
the same list. The KWIC index gave an alphabetical cross-reference
index to the Uniform Issue List and individual tax cases, cfr
Duncan/Peck 1972:23, Seipel 1970:276-277.
Each subject was identified by 8 digits and a character
string of maximum 55 letters:
1-4 IRC breakdown
5-6 Major breakdown
[Page 269 ]
7-8 Sub-breakdown
9-63 Brief word description
The IRC sections did not extend beyond the 8.000 series,
and the 9.000-series were consequently employed to represent issues
not covered by the code. Cfr Cohen/Uretz 1968:4, Duncan/Peck 1972:23.
Documents in the RIRA data base were identified by a
unique 11 digit code, constructed as prefixes and suffixes to the
docet number:
| 1 - | | Code
indicating whether case is before court of original jurisdiction,
Court of Appeals or Supreme Court, |
| 2 - | | Reopening
code (0 = original, 1 = reopened case, etc), |
| 3 - | | Function
code (Tax Court, refund suit, etc) |
| 4-9 - | | Officially assigned docket or jacket number |
| 10-11 - | | Year
case originated |
(Cfr Cohen/Uretz 1968:5, Duncan/Peck 1972:23)
Somebody has to do the indexing work. Usually this is done by
special indexers, but RIRA opted for a simpler system: The lawyers
handling the case did the indexing themselves. This was done on a form
provided by the system, and updating was done monthly on a
computergererated turnaround report, cfr Cohen/Uretz 1968:5, Seipel
1970:276.
In addition, an "abstract" of each case was prepared by the
attorney. This was a description of the case and the positions taken
by the Government and the taxpayer. This abstract was also updated
when relevant changes took place. The abstract was not converted into
computerized form, but was microfilmed. When filmed, it was given a 3
digit reel number and this (along with the number of the frame of the
first page of the abstract) became the "microfilm access number", and
was connected to the case number in the indexes. Microfilm reader-
printers were provided at all offices, and hard copy of the
microfilmed abstracts could be obtained in a very short time.
Retrieval in the RIRA system pivoted on the manual
[Page 270 ]
indexes. The user might use as retrieval criteria either one of
the codes from the Uniform Issue List, or he might choose words from
the KWIC index. In this way he might isolate possible relevant cases,
and consult the microfilmed abstract to assess their possible
relevance and obtain information considered sufficient for his use.
The abstracts were also prepared by the attorneys handling the
case. This had several advantages: The indexer already had a deep
insight into the case, and could easily produce an adequate abstract.
This solution was especially acceptable where no or few formal norms
were laid down for the writing of abstracts (norms such as defined
language, defined notation, etc).
The intermarriage of computer and microfilm techniques made RIRA an
interesting hybrid system, characterized by the simple indexing
language - based on the structure of the Internal Revenue Code, and
the replacement of professional indexers by the users themselves. This
is a solution which is well suited in a professional environment where
the users are disciplined through their legal training of relating
cases to sections in a statute.
Though tailormade to the technical level of the time of its
introduction, we think RIRA is still an interesting example of a
system adapted to an environment of different technical solutions. It
provides a high degree of flexibility at a modest cost, and the
computer is mainly used to produce manual indexes. There are
organizations which may find this a desirable quality of their
information service, and RIRA may in these cases provide valuable
models.
[Page 271 ]
7 CURRENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS
7.1 International organizations
7.1.1 Introduction
International organizations have played a modest role in
development of computerized legal information systems. This role may
be said to consist of two parts. Firstly they may develop legal
information retrieval systems for their own use, and secondly they may
provide fora for the discussion and coordination of the development in
the member countries.
As for developing their own computerized services, only the
European Communities have launched what from the outside is considered
a pertinent legal information retrieval service. There are, however,
interesting activities going on within international organizations
which might have been given a broader coverage than what is offered in
this section.
The 28th session of the General Assembly of the United Nations
accepted the Secretary-General's proposal to develop a United
Nation Treaty System, cfr document A/C.5/1566 of 29 November 1973.
It was reported in 1974 that data from punched cards on treaties 1946-
1972 had been completed, and that tenders for "the programming of the
system" had been invited, Report of the International Law Commission
to the 29th session of the General Assembly, 26 November 1974.
In addition, it is reported that the International Labour
Organization has systems of legal interest, and the World Health
Organization - through its European office in Copenhagen - is
currently (1983) developing a health law information system. Below,
the internal activities of the Council of Europe are briefly
mentioned.
As fora, the Council of Europe has played an
[Page 272 ]
important role (below), and certainly the Communities have
provided different occasions for experts from their member countries
to meet and discuss legal information services - not least through the
intensive period when the Technical Study was conducted (see below).
For third world countries, IBI is becoming increasingly important.
7.1.2 Intergovernmental Bureau of Informatics
A different type of organization is the Intergovernmental Bureau of
Informatics (IBI). This is an independent, international organization
with head offices in Rome. The majority of members are developing
countries, and only few of the Northern American, Oceanic or Western-
European countries are members - the most notable exceptions beeing
France, Italy and Spain.
| Address: | | Intergovernmental Bureau of Informatics |
Viale della Civilita del Lavoro 23
I-00144 ROME Italia
IBI has taken a general interest in computers and law, including
legal information systems. It has, for instance, published a brief
bibliography on informatics and law based on its own information
systems AIDS (Automated Informatics Documentation System) of December
1983 (ref 8307). IBI also sponsored the First National Conference on
Legal Informations in Mexico through its Carribean and Latin-American
regional office, and has convened in Rome expert meetings on the
subject.
Also, it has founded in 1983, through its Regional Centre for
Informatics Education (CREI), an Ibero-American Federation of Law and
Informatics Associations (FIADI). This agreement is subscribed to by
participants from Argentine, Chile, Colombia, Cuba, the Dominican
Republic, Guatemala, Mexico and Spain. Membership is open to all
Ibero-American national associations for computers and law. For the
time being the secretariat will be at the CREI headquarters in Madrid.
Most important is, however, the role IBI has played
[Page 273 ]
in transplanting the ITALGIURE system from Italy to Argentine. In
a pilot project implemented at the end of March 1981, IBI made an
agreement with the Italian Ministry of Justice. Through this agreement
IBI acquired the right to the text retrieval program ITALGIURE/FIND in
its second version for implementation in another country. IBI is to
assist in the implementation and translation of the thesaurus of the
ITALGIURE system. It will also "as far as possible" ensure that
"... Italian-manufactured data transmission equipment and
terminals will be purchased and installed, or at least will ensure
that this is done by companies with Italian capital prevailing."
As the rights to ITALGIURE/FIND II is transferred without
compensation, this clause may be quite justified.
Argentine was the first country to profit from this arrangement,
but further assignments may be made to other IBI member countries.
Currently (1983) Mexico considers a similar agreement, but is
discussing other possibilities. IBI has issued some sort of a handbook
in how to establish a National juridical information system
based on this concept (in English, French, and Spanish, March 1983).
7.1.3 The Council of Europe
The Council of Europe has been the main forum for European experts
within the field of legal informatics. In 1968, the Committee of
Experts on the publication of national state practice in the field of
public international law, recommended to the European Committee on
Legal Co-operation (CJJ) that a committee of experts should be
appointed to study the question of harmonization of technical means of
programming international treaties into computers. The CJJ approved of
this proposal, which in turn was approved by the meeting of the
Ministers' Deputies.
[Page 274 ]
| Adress: | | Council of Europe |
Directorate of Legal Affairs
F-67 007 STRASBOURG France
The new expert committee - which was given the rather awesome name
"Committee of experts on the harmonization of the means of programming
legal data into computers" - held its first meeting in September 1969.
The introductory memorandum prepared by the Directorate of Legal
Affairs contains a survey of the state of the art at that time,
EXP/Ord Jur (69)1.
The history of this committee reflects the history of computerized
legal information retrieval in Europe for the next decade. In the
beginning, there were rather outspoken confrontations between the
"indexing" and "full text" philosophies - but the disagreement faded
away as the systems were developed into versions accepting both
athentic text and indexing terms. Nor will it be unjust to maintain
that the harmonization problems occasioning the establishment of the
committee were not of a critical nature. This was partly due to the
fact that the systems created in the various countries were mainly
dedicated to the documentation of national law, and that the validity
of law is restricted by the jurisdiction of each state In the 1970ies
there were no strong feelings of the necessity of an exchange of data
between national service providers, nor were foreign users interested
in accessing national services. In those cases where the need arose,
language problems and lack of familiarity with the legal system would
make computerized retrieval systems less adequate as a means for
acquiring that information.
The committee recommended certain harmonizations measures as a
"Minimal list of headings for computerreadable legal information" for
four different types of legal documents - providing some sort of
tentative structure which may have promoted some degree of
harmonization on the level of document design.
The standards were incorporated into the appendix to resolution
(73)23. This resolution also recommended several other activities for
member states and the Council of Europe (Albanese/Fickje 1978). One of
these was to establish a new committee
[Page 275 ]
"... to keep the state of research and development in the
field of legal data processing in Europe under review".
This was a recognition of the vital function of the former
committee as a forum for discussions in a field where the speed of
development is high, and where the sources of information are hard to
come by and are rarely up to date.
The new committee - named the Committee on legal data processing in
Europe - had its first meeting in October 1974. It has embarked on a
number of studies, but two main results should be pointed out.
Firstly, the Council of Europe (on its initiative, but in
cooperation with the Commission of the European Communities) published
a study by its consultant, dr Werner Robert Svoboda, on common
standards for the command and search language in legal information
systems. The study should be appreciated with respect to the "Common
Command Language" (CCL) which has been developed for information
services available through the EURONET (below). This standard was
considered insufficiently developed to accomodate the needs of a legal
text retrieval system, and the study suggests some extensions. The
study is to be complemented by a further study by the same author on
elements of a model retrieval language for the legal user (cfr Fickje
1983:3).
The second important result was recommendation No R (83)3, adopted
by the Committee of Ministers 21 February 1983, on the "protection of
users" of legal information services. The recommendation sat out some
quality standards for legal information services, and also specified
which elements should be contained in the contract between the service
provider and user. The recommendation governed only computerized legal
information services, but it is easily seen that the principles may be
extended to (1) non-computerized legal information services, like the
services of a conventional legal publisher, and (2) non-legal
computerized information services, for instance a medical information
system. It was, however, not obvious that such extensions are
appropriate - and this has actually made the recommendation somewhat
controversial (the draft of the recommendation is discussed in some
detail by Oskamp 1983).
[Page 276 ]
The Committee on Legal Data Processing in Europe is authorized to
propose symposia as well - and since 1971 a symposium has been
organized every second year.
| 1971 | | Strasbourg - technical questions |
| 1973 | | Strasbourg - harmonizing measures in the field of legal
data processing in Europe |
| 1975 | | Oslo -
technical aspects of legal data processing |
| 1977 | | Stockholm - the management of legal data bases |
| 1979 | | Vienna -
the protection of users |
| 1981 | | Thessaloniki - computational linguistics and artificial
intelligence for legal information systems |
| 1983 | | Cambridge - legal information services: the state of the
art |
In addition to the symposia, the Committee has since 1975 organized
colloquies in cooperation with the government of member countries on
various justice administration systems every second year (generally
the year in which no symposium is organized).
The Committee has also authorized the secretariat to establish a
Register of Legal Data available in Machine-Readable Form. This
was intended to be a reference work on European computerized legal
services, but is hardly up to date. The register is available from the
secretariat.
The Council of Europe has been rather modest in its own use of
computers for legal purposes. The original committee was, as its name
implied, oriented towards international law, and the Council of Europe
has concluded a number of international agreements and conventions. In
1974 these were computerized through the STATUS text retrieval system
and the facilities of the Atomic Energy Research Establishment at
Harwell (Fickje/Albanese 1978:10). This initial effort, including 96
instruments, have later been updated. A number of national centers
have actually had these data transferred (Denmark, Finland, France,
Norway and Sweden, Albanese/Fickje 1978:3).
In 1981, the Council of Europe established its own computer
service, and started considerations of
[Page 277 ]
establishing a documentation center, based on the decisions of
the Commission on Human Rights. In 1982 the Council of Europe obtained
a pilot version of the Norwegian text retrieval system SIFT, which has
later been developed in parallel in Strasbourg and Oslo. In future one
may therefore expect the Council of Europe to take a more active part
in not only discussing, but also providing legal information services.
7.1.4 The European Communities
In 1967, a working party within the Legal Service of the Commission
of the European Communities was set up to look into the possibility of
creating a computerized legal information service for Community law,
cfr Bauer-Bernet/Streil 1973:9. The system ("petit CELEX") came into
preliminary operation in 1970 (Tapper 1973:283), and since January
1971 it has been available to a limited number of users.
The system is formally known as CELEX, an acronym for Communitatis
Europaeae Lex, and today this is a well known name. Formerly, however,
it has been discussed under several other names, for instance just the
EEC system, the CE-LEX or the database LEX of the Communitiatis
Europaeae, etc - Bauer-Bernet/Streil 1973:9. The system has by some
been confused with the Belgian CREDOC, Vallet 1968.
| Adress: | | Commission of the European Communities |
SII-CIRCE; DG IX - E4
CELEX, Office JCL 4/48
Rue de la Loi 200
B-1049 BRUSSELS Belgium
Community law has several features which gererate problems in
regard to an information system. It is a body of law valid in relation
to several countries, and represented in several equally valid
languages. Some documents, like national case law pertinent to
Community law, are, however, readily available only in one language.
The "half-life" of a legal instrument within the Community is very
short (Bauer-Bernet/Streil 1983:9). This is related to the fact
that the level of generality varies considerably - like from decisions
on constitutional amendments to
[Page 278 ]
subsidiary rates for pig-feed (Tapper 1973:284). Community law
may, in fact, be pointed out as an exponent of what has been called
the "trivialization of law" (Simitis 1974:5), an effect of the
increasing governmental involvement in social affairs. The short
"half-life" has its counterpart in a high production rate of new legal
sources. And regarded as a system, the Community law - though young in
years - does indeed indicate that it is prone to become the victim of
an information crisis, ie a legal system of a detailed nature
undergoing rapid change and being relevant for a great number of users
in different countries.
The documents are designed with a set of more than 30 fixed fields
in six groupes: bibliographical data, text and key words,
classification, dates, cross-references and other analytical fields.
The exact structure may vary between the different types of documents.
The emphasis on the indexing superstructure should be assessed in the
light of the special Community situation where the users have
different languages, and where in the short term the authentic text of
the documents will not be available in translation to all the official
languages. In such a case the indexes will serve as some sort of
"interlinguistic key" to the documents.
The director of the CELEX organization have been Helene
Bauer-Bernet, whose academic qualifications and acute analysis have
contributed towards finding solutions to many of the difficult
problems - both of a practical and theoretical nature. She has been
succeeded by Albrecht Berger, a veteran from the German JURIS project.
Care has been taken to capture the complex citation structure of
the material, Bauer-Bernet/Streil 1973:17-18, Streil 1973:29-30. This
has made it possible to identify related "families" of documents, and
an automated solution to this is currently (1983) being considered,
Pirelli 1983.
In addition, for most document types, the authentic text is
included. This obviously presents a formidable problem for CELEX,
which have a number of different authentic languages - ranging form
Danish in the north to Portuguese and Greek in the south. The
ambitious objective is to have the data base available in
[Page 279 ]
all languages of the Community, but this has to be realized
gradually. Due to the pressing need created by this objective, the
Community takes a strong interest in finding more efficient ways of
translating natural language texts. Cfr Bauer-Bernet 1980:110-112 for
a discussion on the possibilities of automatic translations based on
normalized texts.
A system, SYSTRAN, for pre-translations of such texts are in use.
And an ambitious project, EUROTRA (Official Journal series L 317 of 13
November 1982) aims at creating a system for automatic translations
between all the official languages of the Community within the next
ten years. This project is still (1983) in its two year preparatory
stage.
Some multilinguistic facilities do, however, already exist. There
are some invariant vocabulary of dates, document numbers etc. More
interesting, some formatted fields contain descriptor codes which can
be transposed through the using of multilingual tables with
multilingual "synonyms", cfr Bauer-Bernet 1982:256-257:
| LCT equals | | | Libre circulation des tracailleurs |
Libera circilazione dei lavoratori
Freizugigkeit der Arbeitnehmer
Free movement of workers
Comments are also written in codes following an elementary syntax
which may be translated through substitution tables. For instance
M ART 14 DP 01/01/79
may be translated to
Amended by art 14 since 01/01/79
Aendert Art 14 seit 01/01/79
In this and other ways the CELEX systematically includes
multilingual features in its services.
Today, the available data base is in French and English. The data
base is divided into files and sectors. Below the content is indicated
based on Bauer-Bernet 1982.
The legislation file containing (sector 1) the
treaties establishing the Community in all official languages except
Greek, (sector 2) legal
[Page 280 ]
acts resulting from the external relations maintained by
the Community - not yet available, (sector 3) secondary community
legislation, and (sector 4) complementary Community legal acts - not
yet available. The updating takes place weekly with an updating
response of three to four weeks. The file provides the basis of an
annual register of current Community legal instruments.
The parliamentary and preparatory activities file
containing (sector 5) preparatory documents and parliamentary records
and questions submitted by members of the European Parliament to the
Council and Commission of the Community. These documents are available
only in French for retrospective documentation, but from June 1979 in
five of the official languages. The updating takes place monthly
following the publication of the debates, and two weeks after the
publication of the Official Journal (C series).
The CJUS file (sector 6) containing the decisions
of the Court of Justice of the Communities, updated monthly on the
publication of advance sheets. There is a time lapse of as much as
nine months for publication. However, inbetween summaries with a few
particulars are available in a "hot file".
There is also under planning a literature file (sector 10), Bauer-
Bernet 1982:21.
In the years of 1969-1973, CELEX based its documentation on the IBM
information retrieval system DPS. This system was batch-oriented, and
up to eight search requests were run in two daily batches (Tapper
1973:285). In 1973, however, CELEX switched to the IBM text retrieval
system STAIRS which was in use until the end of 1978 (Technical Study
I 1978:44), and was later used for some time in parallel with a new
system.
Community policy favoured, however, a more European solution. CELEX
was originally intended to switch to the British STATUS text retrieval
system, which was to be further developed to meet the Community
requirements and run on an ICL computer used by the court in
Luxembourg. Technical Study I 1978:44-45 cautioned that one might be
confronted with problems when
[Page 281 ]
trying to use STATUS on such a large data base. Such problems
emerged, and was added to problems created by further political
considerations. The CELEX implementation based on ICL and STATUS was
aborted, and preference given to the combination of the French text
retrieval system MISTRAL, which is marketed by Cii Honeywell Bull,
running on the Honeywell Bull installation of the service bureau Euris
in Brussels.
MISTRAL is quite a traditional text retrieval system allowing a
full range of Boolean operators, distance operators, truncation and
masking (universal character which cannot be used for the first
character or characters), thesauri, etc. MISTRAL is well adapted for
the indexing superstructure of the documents, which can be exploited
directly in the search request.
Though a reliable and well-developed system, we feel that it is
branded by its origin. It is originally hardly developed to handle
lengthy documents in authentic text, but rather to handle documents
composed by intellectual indexing. Its basic design facilitates the
generation of a number of report formats. In our opinion, the system
may be characterized as oriented towards bibliographies, and evidence
of this is present in its internal structure.
The system was originally developed by the Legal Service of the
Commission, primarily for the use of the Commission itself. In 1974,
the Council adopted a resolution of developing an interinstitutional
system (Official Journal series C 20 of 28 January 1975), and created
at the same time a permanent expert group on "Informatique Juridique"
(Losson 1983:2). Today, the system is open for all Community services.
It has also attracted attention from outside users, and will in the
period 1983-1985 be opened gradually as the bases achieve more
multilingual documents. Already, over twenty users outside the
Communities have access to CELEX (Losson 1983:4).
Outside users were granted access to CELEX in 1980, and may
subscribe to the service through Euris, which is a Belgian division of
Honeywell Bull, and which offers CELEX through EURONET. This
organization is also responsible for the training of outside users.
Costs (1982) were 10.000 Belgian francs for annual subscription to
CELEX, and an additional 2.500
[Page 282 ]
Belgian francs per connect hour to CELEX. In addition one must
subscribe to EURONET (the cost of which varies according to the
country, but which generally is quite modest - in the United Kingdom
only 20 pounds per year), and pay a registration fee to Euris of
10.000 Belgian francs. The user also has to calculate cost for
terminal and modem, as well as communication cost to the nearest
EURNET access point.
Host division of
Honeywell Bull SA
Square de Meeus 5
B-1040 BRUSSELS Belgium
The Communities have also taken an interest in the creation of
specialized legal information services. The best known is perhaps
ENLEX, based on the resolution of the Council (Official Journal series
C 139 of 13 June 1977). It has as its objective to supply
bibliographical material on all legal sources pertinent to the
protection of the environment, on Community, international and
national levels. A contract has been entered between the Commission
and the Union for Conversation of Nature and Natural Resources (Bonn)
and Centro elettronico di documentazione girudica (CED) of the Corte
suprema di cassazione (Rome), cfr Losson 1983:5. CED seems to have
established contacts with a number of other national centers - CREDOC
(Belgium), Datacentralen (Denmark), CEDIJ (France), EUROLEX (Great
Britain) and Koninklije Vermande (Holland),
Biagini/Parenti/Natali/Tiscornia/Pirrom 1983.
CEDIJ has established a data base of environmental law in
cooperation with the Ministere de l'environnement, de Vilmorin 1983.
The objective of ENLEX is to furnish small and medium-sized
businesses with a comprehensive legal information to facilitate their
operation (Losson 1983:5).
A second specialized system to be launched is known as EWADAT, and
will be complementary to ENLEX, giving information on the recycling of
containers, etc - cfr Losson 1983:5.
A third such system is known as CADDIA, and was recommended by the
Council in 1982 (Official Journal
[Page 283 ]
series L 247 of 23 August 1982), which will have as its objective
to document legislation and decisions pertinent to trade relations
(Losson 1983:5).
Losson (1983:5) also reports that a service on the Community
systems for export and import, and for the establishment and control
of organizations marketing agricultural products, is being considered.
In addition may be mentioned the ELLIS project, which is an acronym
for European Legal Literature Information Service. This project has
been proposed for the Commission by two private companies, European
Law Center (which is also behind the EUROLEX system) and Europe Data.
The latter company is founded by the major Dutch publishing company
Elsevier-NDU and a development bank, Limburg-LIOF. This project
proposes to make available secondary sources in any language on the
law of the Communities, and would be compatible to existing legal
information services. The project does not envision to document the
secondary sources in authentic text, but to supplement the system by a
document delivery service. Cfr Hainebach 1983. According to Ruoff
(1984:12), this project was initiated late in 1983.
The Communities have also in other ways taken an interest in legal
information retrieval study. In a tender of 8 February 1977, the
Commission invited for the execution of a technical study in legal
information retrieval. The contract was subsequently awarded to a
consortium made up by Sema Informatique (France), Sicon (Great
Britain), SfS (Germany) and Ingenierie Informatique (France). As
director of the study was appointed Norman Nunn Price, one of the
original developers of the British STATUS system, and later the data
base director of EURLEX. The study covered user research, system
description, and the development of a specification of a possible new
text retrieval system for legal information services. The resulting
report consisting of more than half a dozen volumes is a milestone of
legal information systems in Europe - though in the end the Commission
did not develop the system specified in the study.
[Page 284 ]
7.1.5 EURONET DIANE
EURONET has been developed within the European Communities (the
decision of the Council published in the Official Journal series L 100
of 21 April 1975), but is really a consortium of the national
telecommunication administrations. It is a packet communication
network according to the X-series standards of CCITT, closely
corresponding to the French TRANSPAC. It is built around five Packet
Switching Exchanges, in London, Frankfurt, Paris, Rome and Zurich.
Countries outside the Communities may plug into the network through
multiplexers in Amsterdam, Athens, Brussels, Copenhagen, Dublin and
Luxembourg.
At present the network covers 10 countries (extending outside the
Communities, to for instance Sweden and Switzerland). Some 2.500 user
passwords have been issued, and for 1982 60.000 connect hours were
logged.
EURONET is designed to give access to data bases, and some 370
bases on 40 host computers are currently (1983) available. The
information providers have established their own organization - DIANE
- and also a non-profit trade organization - EHOG - under Belgian law.
Of the data bases, some 45 are of a legal nature. None of these are
exclusively DIANE data bases, but are national services offered to
foreign users through EURONET. The services will therefore not be
described in this section, but in the relevant national sections.
A breakdown of the data bases gives the following table (Huber
1983:3):
| 18 | data bases of case
law |
| 31 | data bases of
legislation |
| 29 | data bases of
general legal information in special areas |
(The total is higher than 45 as some data bases overlap.)
In 1981 a special expert group was organized, taking the name of
Committee for European Legal Intermeditary Service (CELIS). This group
considered, in close
[Page 285 ]
understanding with the Commission and EURONET, how best to
develop access to foreign services, and pilot projects were
considered. In addition, reports have indicated considerations to make
CELIS a "legal entity" within the framework of INTERDOC (see below).
7.1.6 World Health Organization (WHO)
The World Health Organization, through its regional office for
Europe, has started the development of a current awareness system in
respect of national health law legislation.
| Adress: | | World
Health Organization |
Regional Office for Europe
8, Scherfigsvej
DK-2100 COPENHAGEN Ø - Denmark
The system is based on reports by national representatives on a
form developed by the regional office for Europe. The authentic form
is not available, as the system mainly is established for WHO to
superivise national implementation of its policy, and for current
awareness functions - alerting a health law expert in one country to
relevant developments within another country.
The data base contained in 1983 approximately 500 documents. These
are available at the computer center of Uppsala University, Sweden
(UDAC) under their information retrieval system MIMER-IR. This is an
interesting system being principally a relation data base system, but
having a text retrieval extention which is used for the health law
system. Though physically in Uppsala, the work of maintaining the
system is done from the European regional office of WHO in Copenhagen.
7.1.7 INTERDOC
Almost at the same time as the Council of Europe started its
activities, the organization INTERDOC was
[Page 286 ]
founded in a meeting in Brussels 6 October 1969. INTERDOC is an
international association, open to lawyers from all countries, with
the purpose of promoting the use of information processing in the
legal field.
Rue de la Montage, 34 - Bte 11
B-1000 BRUSSELS - Belgium
The organization took a few initiatives in the early 1970ies, for
instance in the first international conference on legal informatics
(in cooperation with its French counterpart, ADIJ). In this period it
published the proceedings of the conference, and also a few issues of
an Interim Report.
The organization was rather inactive during a long period, except
for a short spell at the end of the 1970ies, when two more issues of a
journal were published. In 1982 some efforts were made to awaken the
organization, and through a restructuring process turn it again into
an active force in Europe. The two main movers behind this initiative
are Edouard Houtart, the General Secretary, and Guy van der Beek, the
current chairman. INTERDOC has recently (December 1983) announced its
intention to commence the publication of a newsletter if a sufficient
number of subscribers are found.
[Page 287 ]
7.2 Argentina
In one way Argentina is an exciting experiment with respect to
legal information services. In 1982, the Italian ITALGIURE system was
transplanted to Argentina by the assistance of the Intergovernmental
Bureau of Informatics (IBI).
It is discussed above which role the IBI is developing for itself
with respect to national legal information services in member
countries. So far, Argentina is the only example of an effectuated
transfer. However, no extensive reports on the experiment have yet
been made - like reactions to the system by Argentine organizations
and government, extent of data base etc.
The system has been implemented at the Argentine opposite number of
the Italian Corte suprema di cassazione. The staff of the ITALGIURE
cooperated in the establishment of the Argentine system. The Italian
version of the system is described in some detail below at sect 7.15.
One will notice that the thesaurus is an important part of the Italian
system. This thesaurus was translated into Spanish - and it has been
reported that this transformation was rather simple.
It will be interesting to follow this experiment in the next few
years.
[Page 288 ]
7.3 Australia
7.3.1 Introduction
The first time computerized legal retrieval was discussed in
Australia, is reported (Ward 1982:162) to have taken place in 1969 at
the 15th Legal Convention of the Law Council, where KR Pope presented
a paper posing the question:
"How much is the practising lawyer yet aware of the
facilities which the computer could provide to assist him within his
own profession?"
The development has, however, taken its time, though a project was
initiated in 1973.
There has been some interest taken by academics. At its annual
conference in 1982, the Australasian Law Staffs Association adopted a
resolution that law schools in Australia, New Zealand and Papua New
Guinea should consider introducing courses in computers and law,
particularly in the use of legal information systems (Brown 1983:137).
Professor Francis M Auburn at the Law School of University of
Western Australia has taken a keen interest in computers and law.
Professor Roger Brown of the Faculty of Law at the New South Wales
Institute of Technology has taken an initiative in establishing a
Journal of Law and Information Science, which is published
annually since 1981.
| Adress: | | Journal of Law and Information Science |
c/o Faculty of Law
New South Wales Institute of Technology
PO Box 123 Broadway
New South Wales 2007
Australia
Roger Brown has recently been named professor of law at the
University of Tasmania, and has announced his intention to develop his
interest in computers and law from his new chair.
[Page 289 ]
University of Tasmania
Box 252C, GPO
HOBART
Tasmania 7001
Australia
At the University of New South Wales there was conducted a project
jointly with IBM and the Law Foundation. This project sought to
develop search strategies and techniques using a data base on trade
practices and the IBM text retrieval system STAIRS. The project was
terminated at the end of 1977 due to a lack of resources, but IBM
retains the data base for demonstrational purposes (Brown 1983:131).
Professional organizations have also taken an interest. There are
Computers Law Societies in Victoria, New South Wales, Western
Australia, Queensland and the Australian Capital Territory, the
largest being that in New South Wales with some 200 members. The first
was founded in Victoria by Julian Burnside, a Melbourne barrister, in
1975. Further information is available from the address below:
| Adress: | | Mr
Graham Greenleaf, President |
NSW Society of Computers and Law
Macquarie University
NORTH RYDE
NSW 2113 - Australia
7.3.2 The SCALE project
In 1973, the Attorney-General established a Legal Data Committee to
report on the possibilities of establishing a computerized legal
information system, especially in respect to the statutory material
from the Australian Parliament. The committee reported in 1974,
recommending that the Attorney-General should establish such a system.
It was recommended that as a first phase, an interim system should
be established which also could be extended to organizations outside
the Attorney-General's office. The interim system itself was to be
[Page 290 ]
established in two stages.
Stage 1 - A preliminary system based on material already
available in computerized form for the Attorney-General's Department
in Canberra and the Office of Parliamentary Counsel.
Stage 2 - An extension of the data base to comprise the
Constitution, Acts of the Commonwealth and Statutory Rules, Australian
Capital Territory and Northern Territory Ordinances and Regulations,
as well as cases relating to this legislation and to the law of
negligence.
The committee also recommended that a permanent policy body should
be established, and in 1974 the Advisory Committee on the Development
of Legal Computer Systems was established, consisting of
representatives of the Commonwealth Attorney-General's Department, the
States and the Law Council of Australia.
This committee worked further on the plans for an interim system,
and in 1977 the plans for a pilot project at the Commonwealth
Attorney-General's Department was approved. This pilot system was
to be limited to government lawyers.
The Advisory Committee also evaluated the available software, and
decided upon the British STATUS text retrieval program. This has been
found to meet the needs of the pilot project.
The project was becoming known as SCALE, an acronym for "statutes
and cases automated legal enquiry" (Ward 1982:165).
The first data base took as its point of departure the 12 volume
1973 reprint of the Commonwealth Acts, for which the magnetic tapes
for printing were available. To this has been added the Commonwealth
Acts passed 1974-1980, and from 1981 the Acts are added as passed.
The first addition to this data base included the laws of the
Australian Capital Territory, using the texts of the pamphlet reprints
published by the Attorney-General's Department since 1978.
Further additions will include Commonwealth Statutes,
[Page 291 ]
Commonwealth Statutory Rules and regulations. The full data base
will include all Commonwealth Legislation.
Case law was also included in a data base of Commonwealth Law
Reports - the copyright holder, the Law Book Company, waived copyright
for the limited purpose of SCALE (cfr Ward 1982:167). The full text
from volume 127 will be included, while only catchwords and headnotes
will be included for prior volumes. This data base was started in
1980.
In parallel, the Attorney-General's Department has developed a
computer-assisted system for consolidating statutory amendments known
as Legislation Consolidation System (LCS).
An assessment of SCALE was produced in 1981 by the Attorney-
General's Department with a positive conclusion.
7.3.3 Future developments in Australia
In 1981, the Standing Committee of the Attorney-General, comprising
the Attorney-General of the Commonwealth and of each of the states,
made a recommendation which lead to a decision by the ministers to
recommend that systems established in Australia should be "compatible
in basic respects". It was also decided that the information retrieval
software in these compatible systems should be STATUS (Ward 1982:173).
In practise this implies that all government system and all private
systems using Crown copyright material licensed by the government
shall use the STATUS system.
This decision has been critizised, and it has been suggested that
alternative text retrieval systems should be tested at least in an
initial phase (Brown 1982:vii-viii). Brown (1983:130) states:
"This decision was forced on the States by the Federal
government, itself the only ... user in Australia" of computerized
legal information retrieval systems.
[Page 292 ]
In December 1981 the Attorney-General for New South Wales
commissioned a report by Cooley Duglass Associates entitled "A
Feasability Study on a Legal Information Retrieval System for New
South Wales" (Brown 1983:130, 132). Of some interest is the note in
the report that the Crown copyright is the major tool of the
government to control any private operator of legal data bases.
New South Wales, Victorian and Federal governments have agreed on a
single comprehensive system to be operated by Computer Power Ltd,
using the STATUS text retrieval system. Contracts have been let, and
this work is now proceeding, with the first stage being the capture of
sufficient statute and case law to make a workable test data base.
It is currently (January 1984) proposed to run this system using
the computers of Mr Rupert Murdoch's newspaper publishing business in
Australia, until such time as independent computers are acquired.
The first tests of the system are expected to take place towards
the end of 1984. It is expected that the other States will decide to
participate in this project, so that all Australian legal data will be
available through a single data base. Because of the large distances
involved, close consideration is being given to the costs of users
that would be created by the use of the ordinary telephone system for
connection to the data base.
[Page 293 ]
7.4 Austria
After the WIENER SYSTEM project (see above sect 5.4.4), which did
not lead to an operational system, progress in this field in Austria
was made only very slowly.
The Federal Ministry of Justice tried to take over the
experiences of the WIENER SYSTEM, and - in cooperation with IBM
Austria - established in 1974 and during the following years a test
data base including penal law, based on the new Penal Code (which came
into force in 1975).
This computerized documentation includes:
- A data base of penal law decisions in authentic text by the
Highest Court (Oberster Gerichtshof); approximately 250 documents are
retrievable, an additional 3.500 decisions have been computerized and
are stored in machine readable form.
- A data base of all headnotes of these decisons.
- A data base of the new Penal Code and the parliamentary material
concerning the Code in authentic form.
The data bases are operated on an IBM installation at the Federal
Computer Center Agency and are available through the IBM text
retrieval system STAIRS/VS.
It was assumed by law in 1976 that the documentation of the
Austrian social assurance law (SOZDOC) had to be computerized. The
data base was created by the Federal Ministry of Social Affairs, and
computer support is given by the Board of Social Assurance Agencies
(Hauptverband der Sozialversicherungstraeger). The project started in
1977, the data bases have been retrievable since 1979.
There are three data bases:
- A data base of the six statutes including subsequent amendments
since 1979 and the
[Page 294 ]
parliamentary material. This allows for the
reconstruction of the law for any date - an important point in a field
of law where statutes are amended at least once a year.
- A data base of all court and administrative decisions in this
field (approximately 2.500 decisions, the decisions of the Highest
Administrative Court in authentic text).
- A data base of bills, showing the respective versions of the bill.
A data base of international agreements and of the legal literature
in the field is under construction.
The system is operated on an IBM installation of the Board under
the IBM text retrieval system STAIRS/VS.
The purpose of this project is not only to provide a computerized
legal information retrieval service, but also to support the drafting
in the Ministry, and the publishing of a loose leaf edition of social
security law. The data base of the bills are used also to produce the
text of the official gazette.
Recent developements. Only recently developments have picked
up speed. In 1983 some kind of coordination agreement between
important organizations was established. The involved institutions
were (1) the Federal Chancellery, which, from an administrative point
of view is responsible for the Administrative Court
(Verwaltungsgerichtshof) and the Constitutional Court
(Verfassungsgerichtshof); (2) the Federal Ministry of Justice (which
is responsible for the highest civil and penal court (Oberster
Gerichtshof). The agreement concerned the establishment of a
decentralized and coordinated data base using the documentation
departments of the three highest courts. This implies an annual growth
of approximately 10.000 documents.
The system is to be operated on one computer installation (the
alternative federal computer center ZAS) using the IBM text retrieval
program STAIRS - at least for as long as no better system is available
for IBM computers. The documents will be in authentic form. System
analysis is expected to be terminated at the end of 1984.
[Page 295 ]
Two more activities should be mentioned:
The Federal Chancellery has finished the first stage of a
project relating to federal law (statutes, statutory instruments etc)
which are published in the official gazette (Bundesgesetzblatt) and
its predecessors. In this way, a status compilation of all federal
statutes in force was established for the first time, and a classified
index including all amendments was developed. This index will in the
near future (autumn 1983) be available as a data base through the
Austrian teletex system. In addition, plans are considered to
establish a data base of the authentic text of the statutes from this
index.
In 1982 the major legal publisher Manz created a limited
company with participation from representatives of the legal
profession and a bank. This company intends to offer computerized
legal information services, and has also conducted market research and
developed a project plan. No details are, however, available on this
activity.
Another interesting initiative has been made by the Federal
Ministry of Finance. The tax department in cooperation with the
computer department initiated in 1982 a project to create a
comprehensive tax law data base. This is to include all legal sources
of tax law, even ministerial drafts and parliamentary material.
At present two data bases concerning value added tax have been
established - one with a sophisticated structure and with extensive
use of intellectual indexing, one with a simpler structure, but both
including the authentic text.
The further development of this project is not decided. The problem
is that one third of the decisions of the Administrative Court relates
to tax law. It is difficult to see how this project can be coordinated
with that of the Federal Chancellery, mainly because the two projects
have somewhat different objectives. The project aims at establishing a
system for the assistance of the tax administration of Austria, in
order to coordinate the interpretation of tax legislation and the
administrative decisions. In order to facilitate this purpose, an
interesting "guiding instrument" called a thesaurus has been
developed.
[Page 296 ]
The Federal Ministry of Justice is currently establishing a
computerized system for land registers interconnecting the relevant
departments of all courts. As an additional service to this automated
land registry, the Ministry is preparing a data base of court
decisions relating to the relevant law. This will in the near future
(autumn 1983) be operational and available through the same network as
the register itself.
At last a project of the Land Niederoesterreich should be
mentioned. As the first (and so far, only) legislative body in
Austria, this Land publishes its official gazette in the form of a
loose leaf edition (one part for statutes in force, the other for
statutes no longer in force). The tapes for printing this gazette has
been used to establish a data base operated on an IBM installation at
the computer center of the Land administration, and is available
through the IBM text retrieval system STAIRS/VS.
[Page 297 ]
7.5 Belgium
7.5.1 Introduction
Belgium is an interesting country for several reasons: It has the
oldest European operative system, the CREDOC, and its capital,
Brussels, is also the site of the Commission of the European
Communities. Therefore, important activities centering around the
European Communities are related to Belgium as well.
The French-language Free University of Brussels has courses in
computers and law, organized by Helene Bauer-Bernet, who is also one
of the central figures in respect of the CELEX system of the European
Communities.
At the university of Namur, there has been organized a Centre de
recherches informatique et droit (CRID) directed by professor Yves
Poullet. CRID has concentrated on topics like expert systems and
information law. But the CRID has a general orientation, and maintains
an interest in the total area of computers and law.
| Adress: | | Centre de recherches |
informatique et droit de Namur
Facultes Universitaires
Notre-Dame de la Paix
Rue Grandgagnage, 21
B-5000 NAMUR - Belgium
At the University of Gent, there has been courses in "Jurimetrics"
at the Faculty of Law directed by professor M Storme. Assisted by
professor Guy Vandenberghe (who has recently been appointed to the
computers and law chair at the University of Amsterdam, Holland), this
course has been further developed. At the Business School
(Interfacultaire centrum voor management), Vandenberghe directs a
course on computer management which includes several issues of
substantial law. Professor Vandenberghe has also taken the initiative
to the creation of an association for computers and law in Belgium.
[Page 298 ]
In cooperation with CRID (Namur), a new journal will be launched
for computers and law oriented toward the Benelux and French market.
The journal will be published in two versions - a French version
(Jurimetrie) and a Dutch version (Computerrecht). The
first issue is announced for publication in January 1984.
| Adress: | | Rijksuniversiteit-Gent |
Sint-Pietersnieuwstraat 49
B-9000 GENT - Belgium
The Annales de la Faculte de Droit of the University of Liege has
since 1973 published an annual bibliography of Belgian law. The first
part of this is an index to the legal literature composed of
references and indexing terms in alphabetical order. The second part
contains an index to parliamentary and senate documents relating to
legislation. The third part is dedicated to agreements resulting from
collective bargaining between the organizations for employees and
employers.
The indexes for literature (since 1971), for parliamentary
documents (since 1974) and the collective agreements (since 1978) are
available in a computerized system at the library of the university.
7.5.2 CREDOC
Impressed by the advantages offered by operative systems in the
United States, l'Assemble des batonniers de Belgique (which is the
union of Belgian lawyers) and la Federation des notaires (the
federation of notaries) set up a working party in 1966 (cfr Houtart
1969:16, 1973:21). The report of this group formed the basis of the
establishment of CREDOC - an acronym for Centre de documentation
juridique. CREDOC became operational in September 1969 - offering its
services to all Belgian lawyers and in all fields of law.
Rue de la Montagne, 34 Bte 11
B-1000 BRUSSELS - Belgium
[Page 299 ]
Initially the service was fully financed by the lawyers themselves,
though the Ministry of Justice started to provide some financial
support in 1969. In 1967 the total budget was 2 million Belgian
francs, increasing to 47 millions by 1977 (cfr Houtart 1978:3 at note
1). Currently CREDOC is self-supporting, excepting a contribution of
500.000 Belgian franc annually from the Federation des notaires.
The original retrieval programs were developed by the Paris firm
Information rationelle, which also had a hand in the retrieval program
for the Barreau de Paris which was demonstrated in the fall of 1968,
cfr Kornerup 1969:6. They were later, however, radically redesigned by
CREDOC's own staff, cfr Prestel 1971:66.
The computerized system of CREDOC is based on intellectual
indexing. The documentary unit is one section of a statute, one
decision, one article of legal literature, etc. These documents are
then described through an indexing language.
The main components of this language are represented by the
descriptors (descripteurs) contained in a thesaurus with more than
7.000 entries (Wallemacq 1974:2). In addition, the documents may be
characterized by modifiers - 100 ante-descriptors (facettes), and 780
post-descriptors (specificateurs), cfr Houtart 1978:8. Combining the
different types of indexing terms, a great number of concepts may be
specified - numbers in the range of 60.000 are indicated (cfr Houtart
1978:8).
The thesaurus lists the indexing terms in both French and Dutch,
the two official languages of Belgium. To some extent, also German
terms are employed. The terms are specified as a four-digit code,
which is identical for all languages. This code makes the indexing
independent of the language of the authentic text, a point given high
priority in the Belgian bi-lingual society.
In addition to the flat listings of indexing terms, CREDOC has
developed hierarchical structures (rapports paradigmatiques) showing
the relationship between indexing terms, cfr Aars 1971:9. These
structures are used to broaden or narrow down search requests. It is,
of course, rather time-consuming to
[Page 300 ]
create these structures, and Prestel (1971:61) reported at the
time that about half the time of the CREDOC indexers was used to
elaborate indexing structures.
The indexing is done by lawyers on the CREDOC staff. Originally,
the analysis of documents was limited to title and abstract, but was
later widended to embrace the whole of the authentic text, as the
title and abstract were found not to give an adequate understanding of
the source (cfr Prestel 1971:58). An example of a completed analysis
form is given by Prestel 1971:59, and the form itself is discussed by
Wallemaq 1972.
The main reasons for choosing a representation as indexing terms,
was the necessity of bilingualism and the cost factor (which has
changed in favour of authentic texts during the 1970ies). Also the
risk of precision failure is mentioned by Houtart (1978:5). However,
this is certainly no cause of performance failure in general or in
principle more predominant in systems based on authentic texts than in
indexing systems.
CREDOC's objective is to cover all Belgian law. Its data base is
divided into several libraries:
BLEX covering titles, indexing terms and references to
all legal instruments published in Moniteur Belge since 1980 updated
twice monthly;
BJUS covering 55 Belgian legal journals since 1968
updated monthly,
ORBI is a computerization of a system of the Ministere
des relations exterieures, which, since 1960, has analysed
systematically some 700 legal journals from altogether 120 countries;
NLEX is a data base of Dutch legislation in authentic
text prepared in cooperation with the Dutch publisher Vermande en
Zonen, which is again contracted by the Dutch parliament;
CORALIE is developed with funds from the European
Community for legislation on additives to food in all Community
countries, currently (1983)
[Page 301 ]
comprising French, Italian, Belgian and Dutch
legislation;
LJUS is a data base of Luxembourgian case law from the
constitutional court prepared on contract with the Grand duche du
Luxembourg.
The updating response is generally one month, but efforts are being
made to shorten it down to a forthnight (cfr Technical Study II
1977:5).
The questions were originally put to CREDOC in much the same way as
a document was entered. The user did not interact directly with the
computerized system, but contacted a CREDOC staff member. The question
was then transformed into a search request using appropriate indexing
terms combined by Boolean operators. A further sophistication was a
retrieval strategy known as ponderation, in which indexing
terms are eliminated one by one through a predecided sequence, giving
results of ascending generality - some sort of simple ranking
function.
Examples are given by Prestel 1971:63-64, Houtart 1973:8-11 and
Aars 1971:19-22.
Originally, the search requests were processed in batch runs.
Response time was 4-12 days in 1970, but has since been reduced. In
January 1971, CREDOC purchased its own Honeywell Bull 115 General
Electric computer, which corresponded closely to the one formerly used
on a service bureau basis. From then on the system was run once or
twice a day instead of twice a week. Response time consequently
dropped to about one day. In January 1974, the system became
operational on an IBM 370/125 belonging to the company Administra,
Brussels (cfr Wallemaq 1974:3, Technical Study II 1977:2). In 1977
CREDOC was using TRANSAC minicomputers locally, and was accessing the
IBM computers of the Ministry of Economics for retrieval (cfr
Technical Study II 1977:2).
The user received the results as a list of references, accompanied
by a short commentary indicating the probable solution to the original
question. CREDOC does not generally supply the authentic text of the
documents (which is not part of the stored documents), but will on
request supply photocopies as an additional service. If the user so
desires, CREDOC
[Page 302 ]
will also undertake to translate the sources (cfr Houtart
1973:4).
In 1976 CREDOC is reported to have processed approximately 3.000
search requests. Of these 51 per cent originated from notaries, 31 per
cent from lawyers, 12 per cent from universities, and 6 per cent from
legal authorities and others (cfr Technical Study II 1977:2).
From the beginning of 1978 CREDOC made searching facilities
available to end users through the IBM text retrieval system STAIRS
(this did not imply that the old document design was abandoned, only
the introduction of true on-line retrieval). From the end of 1980, all
data bases are accessible by dial-up terminals. The CREDOC service is
available through BELINDIS, which is an organization established by
the Ministere des affaires economique, which also distributes services
from other types of computerized services (cfr Houtart 1982:56-57).
Anybody may obtain a password to the service free of charge, and
pays monthly on the basis of connect time, currently (cfr Houtart
1982:57) 2.500 - 4.000 Belgian franc per hour.
CREDOC was the first European system to be implemented as an
operational service, and has been very important and widely discussed.
Much of the early assessment of the performance of computerized
retrieval was based on CREDOC experience.
In 1969, in its first period of operation, the questions of 50
selected users were analyzed. Of the 347 questions put to CREDOC by
this group, it was found that for 187 questions (54 per cent) the
responses were adequate, for 55 questions (16 per cent) the answers
were inadequate, while for 105 questions (30 per cent) the data base
at this time was insufficient, cfr Le CREDOC 1969:28.
At this time, CREDOC supplied additional conventional
research to compensate for a too small data base. In 1969, when CREDOC
started operation, only 10 per cent of the documents retrieved was
part of the data base, but in the beginning of 1977 this had increased
to 87 per cent, though searches were still being supplemented by
[Page 303 ]
libraries, correspondents, etc (Technical Study II
1977:4).
The main cause of inadequate responses was lack of appropriate
indexing during the initial period, cfr Prestel 1971:65. A later test
(December 1970) gave the more satisfactory result of 85 per cent
adequate responses, cfr Aars 1971:10, while the corresponding figure
in 1977 was 87 per cent (cfr Houtart 1978:5). It should be clearly
understood, however, that these tests concern mainly the performance
of the CREDOC document design (indexing) rather than a computerized
legal retrieval system.
A very interesting experiment was the comparative test conducted by
Prestel 1971b), in which a set of ten identical questions were posed
to CREDOC and the experimental Swiss system CONTEX (cfr below in the
section on Switzerland) based on the authentic texts of the documents.
In this test, the differences in the two approaches were demonstrated,
cfr for instance Prestel 1971b:54, where it appears that of a total of
ten questions, there were retrieved 18 important ("wichtige")
documents by CREDOC, and 42 by CONTEX; 2 interesting ("lesenwerte")
documents by CREDOC and 32 by CONTEX; and 2 irrelevant documents by
CREDOC and 10 by CONTEX. It should to be stressed that the test
results may be explained by other factors than just the difference in
basic document design. Though more than ten years old, the comparative
test of Prestel is one of the very few examples of attempts at
comparing performance of different legal information retrieval
systems.
An appraisal of the CREDOC system cannot be based on such figures
as cited above from the early period of the work. When the Belgian
lawyers set out to solve their research problems, they had to operate
within a number of restraints. Firstly, they had to develop a
completely bi-lingual system, which hardly favoured a solution
based on authentic texts in the late 1960ies. (An interesting
discussion on the problems and possibilities posed by the bi-lingual
approach is provided by Houtart 1972.) Secondly, the computer
available was rather small, making the storage of big volumes of text
rather difficult. And finally it was the question of costs - one felt
that both input and processing would be less expensive if just a
concentrate of the authentic text were being used.
[Page 304 ]
CREDOC also supplies some associated services, like the
preparation of certain indexes which are published, a register of
wills, etc. Its services are also available to other legal information
retrieval systems - and for a period, CREDOC assisted the system of
the European Community in document preparation.
CREDOC is still to a large extent branded and buoyed by its origin;
a tool created by the legal profession to satisfy its own needs, and
consequently as a rather down-to-earth service which is practical and
which has been in operation for a long time.
7.5.3 JUSTEL
In 1976, the Ministerial Committee of Data Processing, authorized
the Ministry of Justice to carry out a preliminary study to determine
whether a computerized legal information system should be established.
Based on this report, the Ministerial Committee decided 5 October 1978
to start the implementation of the system known by the name JUSTEL.
Originally the system was named BELJUS. It was felt,
however, that this might too easily be confused with the data base
BJUS of CREDOC, and therefore the name of the system was changed in
the summer of 1983.
The objective of the system is to establish within a ten years
period a data base of (1) legislation (statutes, regulation, etc) in
authentic and current form in the language of its publication -
French, Dutch or both, dependent upon the context. An extension into
German (which is spoken in parts of Belgium, but which is not an
official language) is considered. (2) All titles (both French and
Dutch) published in the Moniteur Belge since 1900; (3) case law -
summaries since 1945.
For the status at the end of 1983, see van Osternrijk/de Kleermaker
1983:3-4 and BELJUS 1983.
The legislative data base has been established
[Page 305 ]
for social law and the judicial code, a total of 5.383
documents of which 4.098 were available in the spring of 1983.
The case law data base has been established for decisions
by the Cours du travail and Cour de cassation, a total of 16.000
abstracts of which 15.025 were available in the spring of 1983. The
system includes unpublished cases made available directly from the
courts.
The index data base has available 55.000 titles since
1966.
There is also a bibliographical data bank in which
abstracts for approximately 56.000 entries supplemented with
bibliographical information has been prepared.
For updating, a link with the printing office of the Moniteur Belge
has been established.
The documents are designed with a superstructure of indexing terms
to facilitate both retrieval and selective dissemination. Description
of document designs for the three data bases, may be found in van
Osternrijk/de Kleermaker 1983 appendix I, II and III.
A point of interest is that the fields containing the
names of the parties, the judge, the rapporteur and the public
prosecutor or attorney general are not accessible for users, from data
protection considerations. An additional GOLEM password is necessary
to access these - cfr van Osternrijk/de Kleermaker 1983:6.
Retrieval is carried out by the Siemens text retrieval system
GOLEM, also used in the German JURIS system, running on a Siemens
7760. Though the German mnemonics are retained internally, users may
have responses in either French or Dutch.
Auxilliary programs to facilitate updating, management etc is
reported to have been developed by the Ministry of Justice (cfr van
Osternrijk/de Kleermaker 1983:4). These include programs for
transformation of synonyms to unique words, verbs to infinitives and
plurals, genders and casi to the masculin singular (when appropriate),
BELJUS 1983:II.7.
[Page 306 ]
The JUSTEL system is established by the computer center of the
Ministry of Justice (Service generaux, Service informatique juridique)
of the Ministry of Justice in Brussels, using two Siemens computers
(7760 and 7738). In 1983, 12 terminals were connected to JUSTEL. In
the summer of 1983 the system was gatewayed to the BISTEL (Belgian
information system on teletex) videotex system of the central
administration, giving access to the system from 110 terminals in
Brussels and the provinces.
The system is open to any lawyer, and is designed for compatibility
with the Belgian PTT's videotex system.
The relation between JUSTEL and CREDOC is not commented upon in the
sources available to us. Obviously, the Ministry of Justice found it
appropriate to make available a legal information service based on the
authentic language of the legislation, and comprising some important
sources - in this way supplementing CREDOC's services. It is reported
that JUSTEL expect to have CREDOC as a client (Technical Study I
1978:51), and one may expect some sort of cooperation.
7.5.4 Samsom
The Belgian publisher Samsom, through its subsidiary Samsom
Datanet, has included in their fiscal data bank all fiscal decisions
by the Belgian appeal courts and the Cour de Cassation. At 1.1.1984,
the banks included decisions from 1982-83, and at the end of 1984 it
is planned to be extended to 1979-81 as well as the decisions of 1984.
| Adress: | | Wolters Samsom Belgique SA |
Ced-Samsom
Avenue Louise, 485
B-1050 BRUSSELS - Belgium
The documents are stored in authentic text, and the language may be
Dutch, French or German. Each document is supplemented by an abstract
in both Dutch and French, and by indexing terms.
[Page 307 ]
The data bank will also include questions in the parliament,
administrative circulars, decisions by the cabinet or ministries (the
latter only in abstract form).
Updating takes place each forthnight, and decisions are available
4-6 weeks after they are made. The tariff structure is not yet
(February 1984) final, but the subscriber is currently charged 5.000
Belgian francs per hour connect time.
The system is operated on an IBM 4341-II, using the IBM text
retrieval system STAIRS with a Common Command Language (CCL) user
interface.
[Page 308 ]
7.6 Brazil
Brazil is also a federal country with 21 states, 4 territories and
the federal area of Brasilia. It was realized early that a better
legal information situation could be achieved by using computerized
systems.
In 1972, the Processamento de Dados do Senado Federal - PRODASEN -
was founded as a computer center for the federal senate, one of the
two chambers of the congress. The objective of the system was mainly
to assist the congress, and the first of the computerized services of
PRODASEN was SICON, the Sistema de Informacones do Congresso Nacional
(Ribeiro 1977).
| Adress: | | Servicio de Avaliacao e Manitencao (SAM) |
Coordenacao de Informatica do PRODASEN
Senado Federal
BRASILIA - Brazil
The system was implemented on IBM hardware, using the IBM text
retrieval program STAIRS. This program is actually used in numerous
legal information retrieval services, but the PRODASEN installation of
1972 is probably the earliest example of a legal application.
The data base of SICON has a number of files. The files concern
debates in the congress, abstracts from journals, projects of the
congress, information on representatives like the bibliographies of
senators and the general organization of the federal administration.
Three of the files are of special interest to legal information
retrieval:
| NJUR | (Normas
Juridicas) includes information on legislation since 1946
(constitution, complementary statues, "Decretos-Lei", "Decretos" and
other regulations. This file contained (1981) 201.220 documents.
|
| JURI |
(Jurisprudencia) includes information on decisions by the
Tribunais Superiores (Supremo Tribunal Federal, Tribunal Federal de
|
[Page 309 ]
| Recursos, Tribunal Superior do
Trabalho,
Superior Tribunal Militar) since 1961. This file contained (1981) 52.800
documents.
| | THES |
(Thesaurus) contains the defined terms used in the NJUR
file, altogether (1981) 12.148 entries. |
The authentic form of the documents is not entered, rather
bibliographical data and indexing terms are used.
In the system outside SICON are also a few relevant files, for
instance the "Sistema de projetos e comissoes", in which the file MATE
(Materias em Tramitacao) contains information on legislative material.
A statistical exerpt from May 10th, 1977 shows that 73 users logged
on to the system, using it for as much as 982 sessions. This would,
however, also include a number of files of a non-legal nature. The
most recent information (1982) indicate that there are 116 terminals
within the different agencies of the congress, 29 external users in
the capital of Brasilia itself and 13 external users in the rest of
Brazil. Not all of the PRODASEN files are accessible for any user, but
such restrictions are not in force with respect to the legal files
mentioned above.
[Page 310 ]
7.7 Canada
7.7.1 Introduction
One of the interesting aspects of Canada, is the role played by
policy considerations in the development of computerized legal
information services, and the way in which such services have been
seen as part of a national legal information system. As early as 1970
the Department of Justice appointed a special "jurimetrics advisor" -
Stephen Skelly, who was partly responsible for introducing one of the
pioneer legislative information systems in the province of Manitoba -
his colleague being Richard Morgan, currently the Computer Development
Officer to the House of Commons and the House of Lords, United
Kingdom.
Early studies were conducted - the first, known as "Operation
Compulex" (Lang 1972) and published by the Department of Justice,
covered all Canadian lawyers. The second one covered only the lawyers
in the province of Quebec and was conducted by Jaques Boucher and Ejan
Mackaay (published in 1973), followed up in 1979 by another Quebec
survey by Mackaay (1982). Also more theoretical studies were
undertaken, in particular the critical Slayton report (1974a) on legal
information retrieval systems, as well as his report on deontic
systems (which he calls "radical computer use in law"), Slayton 1974b.
The universities have also been heavily involved. The DATUM project
of QUEBEC evolved out of Universite de Montreal, with professor Ejan
Mackaay as an enthusiastic sponsor. Mackaay later became the first
director of the more general SEDOJ, which again developed into the
present SOQUIJ with a general responsibility of legal information
systems in the province, both traditional and computerized. He is now
back in his chair at the faculty of law, being active in the area of
computers and law. The QUIC/LAW system, which has developed into the
nationwide QL Systems, was derived from the enthusiasm of professor
[Page 311 ]
Hugh Laword and his colleagues at Queen's University, Kingston.
A very important step was taken through the establishment of the
Canadian Law Information Council (CLIC) in 1973. This non-profit
organization was formed by the Department of Justice, the Law
Societies and the provincial governments. In principle this is a
private non-profit organization, which also demonstrate a fair
amount of independence in respect of the governments, both federal and
provincial. CLIC became fully operational with a permanent staff as
late as 1975. In 1973-74 its budget was 20.000 dollars, in 1979-80 it
had increased to 826.000 dollars.
| Adress: | | Canadian Law Information Council |
5th Floor
161 Laurier Avenue West
Ottawa, Ontario K1P 5J2
The CLIC organization has 52 members (1980), and is governed by a
board of 15 governors, appointed in order to get a geographical and
cultural representativity. Such a balance is not easily achieved in a
country with both French and English as official language, and both a
common and a civil law system - some common law lawyers speaking
French, and some civil law lawyers speaking English.
There are four divisions, one of them is named "Computers and the
Law Division" and is run by a specially appointed director. (The first
director, M Anne Foster, was in 1982 succeeded by Allan Kling). A
number of committees have been established, among these a committee on
"Computers and the law". CLIC has, however, also a general
responsibility with respect to the traditional legal information
services.
The organization attempts to maintain contacts to the legal
publishers - and this, we understand, is a relation which from time to
time presents some problems.
The friction lies in the fact that CLIC has been
perceived as an organization seeking to interfere in, perhaps even
regulate, the private sector. Private corporations seek to avoid
government interference, and CLIC is seen as being able to call on
government if its aims are not
[Page 312 ]
met by the private sector. This has, however, never been
put to the test.
Mackaay reports (1978:16-17) that CLIC was unsuccessful in having a
release of copyright necessary to establish a computerized system on
existing case reporters. A hesitant recommendation of launching an
experimental system based on abstracts was given, which was thought
modelled on the service bureau scheme adopted by DATUM of Quebec (see
below), and to open in Toronto, which had the largest population of
lawyers. It was after this that Canada Law Book Ltd purchased a
"substantial interest" in QL Systems.
CLIC has taken an active part in the development of computerized
services. Most of these activities have been performed in relation to
QL Systems, but there has also been initiatives to have this service
evaluated with the view of arriving at a better and more unified
computerized legal information service. In 1980 CLIC published a
report titled Looking Both Ways before we cross the Street,
reviewing world developments and relating them to the Canadian
experiences. Emphasizing the reliability of QL Systems, the report
also pointed out that (Foster 1982:47):
"... the system was ageing, and that insufficient
resources were being spent on long-term planning for its upgrading
into the next generation of retrieval systems."
CLIC proposed the appointment of a committee to investigate the
feasability of a single computerized legal information retrieval
network for Canada, a project known by its acronym CLIN. CLIN had
representatives of both the government and the private sector in
addition to CLIC. In 1981, this committee embarked on a major fact-
finding operation in order to determine the properties of such a
system that adequately met the needs of Canadian users. Skelly
(1983:6) reports that there arose "significant conceptual differences"
among the participants, and during 1982, an impasse had been reached -
though discussions for possible future cooperation are still taking
place.
Another exciting study of CLIC focuses on the possibilities of
using the data base of a text retrieval system (the data base of QL
was used for the pilot study) for generating aggregated data on court
[Page 313 ]
activity and trends. It is indeed interesting to see explored the
possibility of satisfying some of the needs for statistics through a
text retrieval data base, and there are few examples of this having
been attempted (cfr Rees-Potter 1983 for a discussion of the
experiment).
No journal within the field is published in Canada, but
the US Law and technology does actually have Canadian editors.
Also, CLIC publishes a number of relevant reports and papers. CLIC is
expected soon to release Dossier, a survey of research in
progress in the law.
7.7.2 Quebec: From DATUM to SOQUIJ
DATUM is an acronym for "Documentation Automatique des Textes
juridiques de l'Universite de Montreal", which was a joint research
venture of the law faculty and the computer center, intended to
provide the legal profession as a whole with a computerized and
bilingual case law retrieval system. The project was initiated at the
end of 1968, and was from the beginning managed by professor Ejan
Mackaay of the law faculty.
The retrieval system was inspired by Horty's design of a text
retrieval system, but was developed from scratch by the DATUM team
(cfr DATUM 1970). The search language was rather simple, including a
full spectrum of Boolean operators and positional logic, cfr
Thibault-Iezzoni 1971. Special interest is still associated with
the innovative, bilingual thesaurus structure, cfr below. The system
was originally implemented on a CDC 6.400 computer, and operated then
in a batch mode. Its search language was based on Boolean logic, and
results generally presented as a case reference followed by key word
abstracts and extracts from the authentic text with search terms
highlighted (a KWIC format), cfr Mackaay 1976:16.
In May 1971 a small scale test was performed on 254 decisions of
the Quebec Court of Appeal (Queen's Bench, 1951). The results were
sufficiently encouraging to warrant the moving towards a bigger data
bank, and to launching a service in principle
[Page 314 ]
available to all Quebec lawyers by the end of 1970. Since July
1971 the system became operational on a data base of 140.000.000
characters, cfr Mackaay 1973:104, representing about 15.000 cases
included in the three most utilized series of case reports in Quebec,
the reports of the Supreme, Appeal and Superior courts from 1975 to
date (for the period of the operation of the system). Legislation was
not included, but another Quebec project - Modul/Deploi - at the
Universite Laval, consentrated on this type of legal sources, cfr
Goulet/Houle/Leclerc-Houde 1971. This project resulted in the system
which the Editeur Officiel of Quebec currently uses for publication
and updating of the statutes of the province, cfr Mackaay 1982:529.
In the beginning DATUM offered its services to the private lawyer -
a total population of approximately 6.000 lawyers and notaries within
the Quebec jurisdiction. It became apparent that the cost of the
service could not be covered in this way, and since July 1973 the
services also became available to judges and lawyers within the public
administration. In return, the government paid a fixed sum to the
DATUM project. In September 1973 it was estimated that one third of
the Quebec lawyers were customers of DATUM, and the number of
questions accepted by DATUM had increased from 1.000 in 1972 to 6.000
in 1973, cfr Tapper 1974:12.
The DATUM system was created to meet the particular needs of the
Quebec lawyers, a factor reflected in its design.
The first and major requirement was that of bi-lingualism. Canada
has two official languages, French and English. In the province of
Quebec, the primary language is, of course, French. Also, the legal
system of the province is based on civil law rather than common law.
The retrieval system was designed to cope with this complex situation.
This is not merely a problem of language, and as Mackaay has pointed
out (1971:59) the two legal systems are conceptually incongruent as
well.
CLIC has a project to develop a dictionary of French
words for common law concepts. Often French lack terms to describe a
common law concept, or the French term has civil law
[Page 315 ]
connotations making it ambigious if applied to common
law.
This situation may be found to discourage a text retrieval
solution. Other systems have solved the problem by having a common
indexing language for both natural languages (for instance the Belgian
CREDOC system). DATUM chose to develop a bilingual thesaurus system.
Two types of thesauri were developed, the so called s-thesaurus and
the so called g-thesaurus. The latter supplies a grammatical expansion
of the word in a search request (plural, feminine form, inflected
forms, etc). This thesaurus is rather conventional, and we shall not
pursue the discussion of this further (cfr Schwab 1971 for a
discussion of its design).
The s-thesaurus, however, is designed to extend a given term into a
series of equivalent words or expressions, both in English and French.
This is necessary, it was thought, as a lawyer might read both French
and English texts without difficulty, but was not able to formulate
search request with sufficient ease in both languages.
For developing this thesaurus, the method suggested by Irving
Kayton (1966) was adopted. Selected passages from the very cases to
become included in the data base were examined manually, and key words
or phrases were replaced by synonyms - and this would be a synonym
within that exact context. By this method, a great number of "source
lists" were produced, consisting of the term originally found in the
text and the assigned synonyms. These lists were then processed by a
program which, using the word statistics provided by the list, decided
when two lists should be merged, and when they should be kept apart as
representing two different meanings of a homonym. Thus lists of
synonymity in each languages were produced. The source terms were
translated, and the corresponding source terms in the other language
were included in the first list, creating a unilingual thesuarus with
entries in both languages, and synonyms in both languages for any
entry.
The reciprocity of the synonym structure was used to
group synonyms in two categories - close and less related synonyms.
This is to say that if the
[Page 316 ]
source list for term a included term b, and the source
list of term b included term a, there was reciprocity and close
synonymity. If, on the other hand, term b occurred in the source list
of term a, but not vice versa, term b was a less related synonym to a.
In this way, the s-thesaurus would, for certain source
words, list all registered meanings. For each meaning there will be a
list of synonyms, organized on several levels: (1) precise
translations, (2) close synonyms in the language of the source term,
(3) close synonyms to the exact translation of the source term given
under (1), (4) less related synonyms in the language of the source
term, and (5) less related synonyms to the exact translation of the
source term given under (1). The user might select to which level of
synonymity he would expand his search request.
To our knowledge, this thesaurus still represents the major attempt
to create an appropriate solution for a multilingual text retrieval
system. The departure point is important - the substitution of words
in context as they actually occur in the material to be stored.
In this way, it might be reasonable to hope that the synonymity
problem was solved more satisfactory than if synonyms had been
substituted in a general, out of context manner.
The legal language is not, however, static, and the initial method
does not offer a solution for maintaining the thesaurus. This would
have to be done by periodically repeating the procedure, and would, of
course, represent an added cost in maintaining the service.
Several similarities may be found between the DATUM
design and the design of DOCILIS by CEDIJ, France. This is by no means
accidental, the results available from CEDIJ seemed to have been
carefully studied by the DATUM project. There were, however, some
basic differencies - for instance, the DOCILIS operated with a
hierarchical synonym thesaurus, while DATUM settled for a flat
structure - cfr Mackaay 1973b:3-4. Other differencies arose, of
course, out of the bi-lingualism of DATUM, and different computer
environment.
[Page 317 ]
The second point of principal interest with respect to the DATUM
project, was the interface with users. DATUM operated on a service
bureau basis. Questions were formulated in writing (cfr Slayton
1974:27- 28 for an example of the forms employed), or a consultant at
DATUM might be contacted and the search request formulated in a
discussion with the consultant. The resulting output (and several
output formats were available, cfr Slayton 1974:11-12 and 29-32 for
examples) was returned by mail to the user accompanied by the comments
of the consultant. There was also a follow-up session, in which the
consultant discussed the result with the user (Tapper 1974:12).
DATUM actually filed their searches for improvement of
service quality. If an identical question arose, the file might be
supplied once more. Also, elements of earlier searches might apply. In
this way, DATUM created - as Tapper (1974:12-13) puts it - a post
facto thesaurus. DATUM also marketed hard copy service-dossiers
which were mini-indexes of 35 - 250 references on specialised
topics like child custody in divorce cases, expropriation, injunction,
false representation in insurance contracts, liability of
municipalities etc (cfr Mackaay 1978:11). Tapper (1974:12) reported
that 23 such packages were sold in editions of 50-200 copies (25-75
dollars - per copy).
The justification of the service bureau model was user needs.
Canadian user research demonstrated quite early (cfr Lang 1972) that
the legal information situation was least satisfactory in the outlying
areas and at small law offices. With respect to such users, it was not
realistic in the beginning of the 1970ies to expect that they would
acquire terminals, it would have implied a considerable investment,
cfr Mackaay 1973:105-106. This is certainly an argument of
considerable weight. As we have shown by our model of the user's
information situation, availability factors play an important role in
determining the coverage of the user-constructed information system.
Distance is just one such trivial, but nevertheless an all-important
availability factor - capital investment being another. Introducing an
improved legal information system that in principle is available all
over a country, will have little effect if "distance"
[Page 318 ]
is just replaced by "high costs". Actually, the users would
probably come to be large law firms in central areas, just those users
who already enjoyed the better information situation. This type of
reasoning seems to be typical both for the Quebec situation and for
the Canadian reasoning in general. Therefore it must be fair to say
that the rather negative attitude towards the US LEXIS system has been
based on a feeling that it would indeed result in a replacement of
"distance" by "high costs", and thereby sustain and possibly
strengthen the availability discrimination of small law firms and
other "small" users.
The service bureau model was, of course, one strategy attempting to
solve this problem - it is both an obvious and simple solution. The
users did not have to commit themselves to a great investment (a
question averaged in the mid-1970ies 35 dollars); the telephone was at
hand to contact the DATUM bureau - and a province-wide computer
assisted legal information service had been established.
In the mid-1970ies DATUM was reorganized. A Service de
documentation juridique, Inc (SEDOJ) was created with professor
Mackaay as the first director. SEDOJ was responsible for integrating
all the different legal information services of the province, both
manual and computerized. Apart from the DATUM project this included
the project MODUL (mentioned above) of the Universite Laval, the
Quebec law reports and the Mini-Biblex microform service for case
law in cooperation with the US company Bell and Howell. In 1974 SEDOJ
took on the responsibility of publishing the case law of the province
- which since 1892 had been a task of the Bar Association.
In 1975 legislation was passed to establish a provincial crown
corporation to take on the activities of SEDOJ - Societe quebecoise
d'information juridique (SOQUIJ). Its objective was to continue the
publication of case law, increase its quality and in general enhance
the quality of the legal information system. This legislation entered
into force in 1976. SOQUIJ has a board of 12 members, and has a
General Director as head of a staff of some 45 persons (1980). The
annual budget was, in 1980, approximately 2 million dollars.
At this time, design specifications for an on-line
[Page 319 ]
and modernized version of DATUM was presented by Mackaay (1976).
Like in the DATUM I retrieval program, the design specifications show
originality and imagination. The DATUM II system was, however, never
developed - and therefore we shall not discuss in detail the proposed
system.
One feature should be mentioned, however, namely the incorporation
of what Mackaay calls relevance feedback. In the inverted file
each search term is associated with a weight ("relevance weight").
Initially this is computed on the basis of word statistics (the
algorithm is not specified in the design). These weights are then used
in ranking the retrieved documents. The method is similar to earlier
suggestions of for instance Sparck Jones and Salton (cfr Mackaay
1976:31-32). To this is, however, added the idea of "relevance
feedback". The user is requested to rank retrieved documents
"... as very relevant (i.e. should have appeared earlier
in the ranking), modestly relevant (i.e. should remain there) or not
relevant to his purpose (i.e. should appear much further down in the
ranking). These indications are collected by the computer during all
search sessions and used to increase the weight of the query terms in
documents rated 'highly relevant' or to reduce it in documents the
user judges not relevant." (Cfr Mackaay 1976:32 - obviously Mackaay
has a different relevance concept than used in this book.)
Though ingenious, there are several drawbacks of this method. A
problem discussed by Mackaay, is the inconsistency of user evaluation,
causing "oscillation" of the weights, and measures are suggested to
control this. In our opinion, one would also have problems caused by
the lack of a direct link between the "graded relevancy" of a
document, and the weight a term should have in ranking. The ability of
a term to discriminate between documents in a retrieval system depends
heavily on the context in which the word appears. Obviously the word
"tax" should carry little weight in a tax law library, while it should
be given higher weight in a criminal law library (indicating white
collar crime). Though the average example would not be this obvious,
the use of a system by users with different areas of interest would
introduce a similar tendency to "oscillate" as Mackaay pointed
[Page 320 ]
out with respect to inconsistency. To this is added the
difficulty of getting user cooperation at all - experience should make
anybody skeptical to relying on extra efforts on behalf of the users
to maintain the system.
These points of criticism should not, however, shroud the main
lesson from the DATUM II design. It was felt that a form of ranking
should be introduced in the system, as the Boolean strategies did not
give sufficient help to find the most interesting documents first. On
the other hand, one was unwilling to let go of the well structured
Boolean search requests, which in general were satisfactory, and opt,
for instance, for the ranking algorithms of QL Systems (cfr below).
One tried to find a way of intermarrying Boolean and ranking
strategies - and this is, indeed, an objective we think is necessary.
Though the method proposed may be insufficient, it is one of the first
proposals for such an intermarriage with respect to an operational
legal text retrieval system.
As mentioned, the DATUM II design was never implemented, and the
batch oriented DATUM I became outdated. SOQUIJ discontinued the system
from 30 June 1979. The costs at that time for processing a question
was 50 dollars, while the estimated real cost was 250 dollars.
In 1979, SOQUIJ also conducted a major user study based on 746
detained questionnaires filled in by private practising lawyers,
company lawyers, government lawyers, judges and academics. The results
of this study is presented, for instance, by Mackaay 1982 - and is an
example of the care taken in Quebec as elsewhere in Canada for
providing a sound basis for the introduction of new services.
SOQUIJ has expressed an interest in moving on to another
computerized system, and the alternative of QL Systems seemed at one
time an obvious candidate. However, the present development in Canada
seems to make this choice less obvious. SOUQIJ has indicated that
through a cooperation with the Quebec Ministry of Justice, a retrieval
system for Quebec statutory and case law will be constructed. The
statutory data base is (November 1983) announced for May-June 1984.
This system will be based on the IBM text retrieval system STAIRS (cfr
Skelly 1983:3).
[Page 321 ]
7.7.3 From QUIC/LAW to QL Systems
Since 1961, the Queen's University, Kingston, was engaged on a
Treaty Project, collecting and annotating the treaties of the British
Commonwealth. About 18.000 (1970) detailed treaty records had been
prepared. Since 1967, computerized word processing had been used to
amend these records. The Treaty Project became a major activity as
treaties for a number of developing countries were prepared from these
records - cfr Lawford 1968, Lawford/Latta/von Briesen 1970:3, Tapper
1973:279-80.
The enthusiastic professor Hugh Lawford was a moving force behind
the Treaty Project. In 1968 he initiated another project to become
known as QUIC/LAW - an acronym for "Queen's University Institute for
Computing and Law". Following an exchange of letters in late 1968, IBM
Canada and Queen's University launched a study of potential
applications of computerized systems for legal information retrieval.
A production organization for converting legal sources into machine
readable form was established, and the conversion took place at a high
rate. A number of contacts were made with other universities,
publishers, etc, to secure material, as QUIC/LAW aimed at growing into
a nationwide legal research service. Funding was provided also by the
Federal Department of Justice.
In 1972, QUIC/LAW was set up as a commercial system to market its
services to lawyers. And the retrieval system offered was of a
somewhat different basic design than the other systems of that time,
which to a great extent relied only on Boolean search strategies.
QUIC/LAW decided to base their system on ranking algorithms.
QUIC/LAW was initially attracted to the IBM systems like DPS
(Document Processing System). After Richard von Briesen had joined the
team, they proceeded to develop their own text retrieval program, cfr
Mackaay 1978:15). The point of departure was INFORM/360, an unreleased
program developed by IBM for internal use in the corporate headquarter
use in Armonk, New York, cfr Slayton 1974:10, Lawford/Latta/von
Briesen
[Page 322 ]
1970:3. Several difficulties were encountered in the adaption of
INFORM/360 for the use of QUIC/LAW, mostly connected to a lack of
compatibility in the operating systems. Though redesigned, the basic
properties of this program were retained. The program is written in
IBM assembler.
Ranking algorithms may be constructed on the assumption that the
occurrence in a document of words specified in the search request, is
an indication of probable relevance. A simple algorithm would be based
on just counting the number of different words in the request also
occurring in the document, and sorting documents according to the
resulting score. It is easy to see that such a scheme would favour
long documents compared to short documents - which again could be
compensated by taking document length into account. A general
discussion of ranking algorithms of this type, with examples and
results of empirical research, is given above at sect 4.5.2 (3).
For QUIC/LAW, quite sophisticated ranking algorithms were
developed, taking into account the length of the document, the
relative frequency of occurrences within the document compared to the
frequency of that term within the data base (distribution of the
term), etc. Altogether eleven algorithms were made available in
QUIC/LAW (and we believe some of them have survived in the IBM text
retrieval system STAIRS, which offer five such algorithms).
Such retrieval strategies make possible what may be called a
natural language search request: The user is not obliged to follow the
artificial syntax of a search language, but may formulate the request
as if he was jotting it down on a piece of paper to pass on to a
colleague. This certainly simplifies the user interface, but only at
the cost of reduced performance - as the information inherent in the
structure is not available for the system.
Boolean operators were employed in the QUIC/LAW system as
restrictions. Words in the request might be combined by Boolean
operators in order to specify that documents not containing the
combination (for instance where only a, not b occurs) should not be
considered retrieved, and not be included in the ranked list of
documents. Positional operators were originally not available.
[Page 323 ]
For examples of searches conducted by this version of the QUIC/LAW
system, see Slayton 1974:16-17, printouts 33-35, and Lawford
1973:72-93 with rather detailed examples of retrieval strategies and
output formats. The QUIC/LAW system was from the beginning terminal
oriented, response time reported to be a maximum of 30 seconds and an
average of 10 seconds, cfr Lawford 1973:70.
The QUIC/LAW project was conceived as the start of a Canadian legal
information system. But only a year after it was established as a
commercial enterprise, in March 1973, IBM and Queen's University
withdrew their support. The Canadian Department of Justice continued
to support the system for a three months test period to measure usage
of the system by lawyers, and to assess the feasibility of an expanded
service, operated either by the Department or a private company.
The test included 16 terminals located in law firms and public
administration (including the Department of Justice) in Ottawa and
Toronto. The available data base was composed of Supreme Court Reports
from 1923 (145.000.000 characters). Federal Court Reports (6.000.000
characters). Revised Statutes of Canada (33.350.000 characters), and
28.000 bibliographical index records of the Queen's University Treaty
Project (cfr QUIC/LAW 1973).
The final report of the test is in its own right a valuable
product, but the Department of Justice proved unwilling to prolong its
support of the QUIC/LAW project. Rights in the project were
transferred to a new company - QL Systems Ltd - set up in Ottawa in
1974 with Hugh Lawford, Richard von Briesen and Canada Law Books Ltd
as the original shareholders.
408 Princess Anne Building
Princess Street Kingston, Ontario K7L 1G1
Canada
And this is actually a new beginning. As QL-system the activity was
generalized, and a new form of legal service was offered.
[Page 324 ]
One of the first ventures of QL was the contract with the US
publisher West. The retrieval programs were furnished to West, and
formed the basis for their WESTLAW service. The programs are also sold
to others, for instance newspapers in Canada and the US.
At the same time changes were made in the QL retrieval programs. A
number of these amendments are based on information emerging through
the user test (cfr QUIC/LAW 1973:8-9, Tapper 1974:3-4, 1976:9).
The text retrieval, system, now known as QL/SEARCH, includes today
expansion to a full range of Boolean operators, positional logic,
possibility of phrases as search terms, possibility of saving
requests, etc. The original ranking strategy has been retained, but
reduced to three default algorithms.
Method A:
Ranking based on the sum of all occurrences of search terms
in the document.
Method 5:
Ranking based on the sum of different search terms
occurring in the document.
Method N:
Ranking as method 5, but using
method A as a secondary criteria.
QL systems states that method N "has been found to
produce the best results in most cases", which corresponds to the
empirical examination of the performance of word frequency ranking
strategies discussed above at sect 4.5.2 (3).
QL also terms their useful chronological and reverse chronological
sorting a "ranking". For a detailed description, see the QL/SEARCH
manual.
The computer facilities of QL - an IBM 4341 - are still based in
Kingston, Ontario, and can be accessed by any terminal with a standard
communication interface and through the Canadian packet switching
network, Datapac. It is available around the clock. The pricing
structure have different levels for peak and off-peak hours, and a
package pricing scheme is available for terminal, printer and
communication for unlimited searching at a flat hourly rate. (Cfr
Skelly 1983:4.)
In addition to automated retrieval, QL provides word processing and
electronic mail services.
QL Systems plays the host for a number of information
[Page 325 ]
providers. Most legal information retrieval services own the data
bases offered through that service. QL owns just a few of the 65
publicly available data bases, containing approximately 15.000.000.000
characters.
This is reflected in the pricing structure. QL takes a fee for
maintaining the data base of the provider, but seeks a contract for
opening this for other users. If such an agreement is reached, the
provider is given some advantages- for instance the provider is given
50 per cent of fees for usage of this data base. This is deducted in
the fee the provider has to pay QL. In addition, the provider may
stipulate an extra fee - a "royalty" - for accessing his data base.
Of these 25 are English, and 5 French language legal data bases. Of
the non-legal data bases, one contains the authentic text of stories
carried by the Canadian Press Wire Service (cfr Skelley 1983:4).
The Department of Justice has supported the development of QL
Systems, and uses the system to maintain a data base of federal
statutes, updated annually from the legislative information system
maintained by the Department itself. The rather infrequent updating
seems to be related partially to practical problems, partially to the
problems of legislation being passed before it comes into force.
The Department of Justice also maintains a data base of Supreme and
Federal court cases. These are stored as only headnotes (in English
and French), due to the costs.
The legal data bases as listed 1982, are as follows:
| ACWS: | | All-Canada Weekly Summaries since 1977 - CAN/LAW.
|
| APR: | | Atlantic
Province Reports since 1969 - Maritme Law Book Co Ltd (headnotes).
|
| APR: | | Atlantic
Provinces Reports. |
| AR: | | Alberta
Reports (part of the NRS data base). |
| CAC: | | Constitutional Acts of Canada. 42 Acts from the Royal
Proclamation Act 1763 - Department of Justice. |
| CCC: | | Canadian
Criminal Cases since 1971 - CAN/LAW
|
[Page 326 ]
(headnotes)
| CODOC: | | Co-operative Documents. An index to Canadian, foreign and
international government documents catalogued by 11 Ontario university
libraries - 856.740 documents. |
| CRR: | | Regulatory Reporter - summaries of decisions of federal and
provincial regulatory boards, including the Canadian Transport
Commission (since 1975), the National Energy Board, and the Canadian
Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission (since 1979), CLIC.
|
| DLR: | | Dominion
Law Reports since 1955 - CAN/LAW (headnotes). |
| ECR: | | Exchequer Reports - decisions of the Exchequer Court form
1888 to the introduction of the Federal Court of Canada Reports.
|
| FCR: | | Federal
Court of Canada Reports since 1971 - Federal Department of Justice
(headnotes). |
| MANR: | | Manitoba Reports (part of the NRS data base) |
| NBR: | | New
Brunswick Reports (part of the NRS data base) |
| NFL: | | Newfoundland and Prince Edward Island Reports (part of the
NRS data base) |
| NR: | | National
Reporter (part of the NRS data base) |
| NRS: | | National
Reporter System - Headnotes of 4.020 Maritime Law Book reports of
decisions after 98 APR 352, 35 AR 483, 12 MAN R (2d) 368, 39 NBR (2d)
631, 36 NFLD & PEIR 115, 41 NR 271, 50 NSR (2d) 352 and 15 SASK R 91.
|
| PDC: | | Predecessor and Defunct Companies - Financial Post.
|
| NSR: | | Nova
Scotia Reports (part of the NRS data base) |
| RBC: | | Regulations of British Columbia (incomplete) - Attorney
General's Office. |
| RO: | | Regulations of Ontario. RSC: Revised Statutes of Canada.
|
| SA: | | Statutes
of Alberta, status 1983 - Legislative Counsel Office |
| SASK: | | Saskatchewan Reports (part of the NRS data base).
|
| SBC: | | Statutes
of British Columbia, status 1979 - Attorney General's Department,
British Columbia (authentic text).
|
[Page 327 ]
| SCR: | | Supreme
Court Reports since 1876 - Federal Department of Justice (headnotes)
|
| SM: | | Statutes
of Manitoba, status 1981 - Manitoba Legislative Council (authentic
text). |
| SMC: | | Statutes
of Manitoba Citator, judicial decisions since 1970 - Law Society of
Manitoba and CLIC (citations and summaries). |
| SNB: | | Statutes
of New Brunswick (authentic text) |
| SO: | | Revised
Statutes of Ontario, status 1981 - QL Systems (authentic text).
|
| SOR: | | Statutory Orders and Regulations, status 1981 - Federal
Department of Justice (authentic text). |
| SS: | | Statutes
of Saskatchewan, status 1982 - Saskatchewan Legislative Counsel Office
|
| TAR: | | Tax
Advance Rulings since 1974 - Department of National Revenue, Taxation
(authentic text). |
| WCB: | | Weekly
Criminal Bulletin since 1976 - CAN/LAW (abstracts). |
| WWR: | | Western
Weekly Reports since 1968 - Carswell (headnotes). |
The Department of Justice has an expenditure of approximately
60.000 dollars annually in respect of QL, which is also used
internally by the Department. It is pointed out that the government
policy requires the use of private services if less than 20 per cent
more expensive than what a public agency could offer.
The statutes of the majority of the ten provinces are also
available through QL Systems. Case law data bases covers also the
decisions of the superior courts of each province, and some
quasi-judicial regulatory boards. Average time depth of these case law
data bases is 20 years (Skelley 1983:4-5).
The CLIC sponsors four data bases on the system, paying all storage
and updating costs.
A majority of the case law (more than 50.000 cases) is provided by
Canada Law Book, a major Canadian legal publisher. CAN/LAW data bases
cost 10 dollars pr hour more than other QL data bases. The data bases
include Dominion Law Reports, Canadian Criminal Cases, All Canada
Weekly Summaries, and the Weekly Criminal Bulletin - in various time
depths.
[Page 328 ]
| Adress: | | Canada Law Book Ltd |
240 Edward Street
Aurora, Ontario L4G 3S9
Canada
Canada Law Book has decided to make their own service more visible
within the QL Systems, and have adopted the acronym CAN/LAW as a
trademark for their data bases. They have also hired the former
director of Computers and the Law of CLIC, Anne Foster, as their new
coordinator for legal information systems.
Canada Law Book has also published aids for retrieval, for example
an "Index summary for CAN/LAW" with suggestions for synonyms and a
recommended retrieval strategy dubbed "concept mapping" (which
corresponds to the recommendation made by Horty and cited above under
part IV, and not dissimilar to the conceptor based retrieval strategy
discussed above in sect 4.5.2 (3)).
A service known as QL/Mail Box 100 has been opened for CAN/LAS
judgments. Through the QL system, Canada Law Books will accept orders
for photocopies of judgments noted in the ACWS and WCB data base.
It has been announced that in the future CAN/LAW will be enlarged
to contain additional data bases, as well asspecialized services
"exclusively to legal research" (Canada Law Book Publication Catalogue
1983). These include on-line index terms for the data bases CCC and
DLR, in addition to forms and precedents for use in law offices. These
new services will be available in 1984.
In 1980 QL Systems were reported to have approximately 500 users.
As a measure to encourge growth, the Computers and the Law Committee
of CLIC proposed in 1977 the establishment of a Service Center. Three
pilot centers were established in 1978 at the universities of Alberta,
Calgary and British Columbia. In 1979, seven new Service Centers were
established, and by March 1980 altogether 14 Service Centers had been
established. (Cfr CLIC - Service Centers 1980.)
These centers should (1) encourage the incorporation of
computerized research in the curricula of the faculties of law, (2)
introduce computerized systems to practitioners in a way which made
them both
[Page 329 ]
understand and appreciate the new methods, and (3) the centers
should channel feed-back of user needs back to CLIC.
By 1982 more than 5.000 students had participated in courses or
seminars (cfr Foster 1982), and additional demonstrations etc had been
organized for practitioners, faculty members etc. An important feature
of the service has been to provide extensive research facilities to
lawyers in isolated rural communities without access to major
libraries.
7.7.4 Carswell Legal Publications
Carswell Legal Publication is a Canadian subsidiary of the British
major legal publisher Sweet and Maxwell, which are holding shares in
the British EUROLEX system. They have announced a text retrieval
service in the near future (possibly May 1984), but at present we are
not familiar with further details (cfr Skelley 1983:6).
[Page 330 ]
7.8 Denmark
7.8.1 Introduction
Denmark is a rather atypical country in respect to legal
information systems. It is one of the countries with the longest
record of interest in the issue, but hardly with any
overwhelming results so far.
The interest dates back to 1967, when the Danish Law Society (Dansk
juristforbund) established a committee on legal information services
(cfr Korenerup 1970:229). This committee was chaired by Poul Eefsen of
the Ministry of Justice, but its main exponent was one of the
secretaries, Uffe Kornerup of the Ministry of Justice, who explored
the issue in a number of reports, and did also travel extensively to
research the then budding efforts in other European countries. Also,
the work was buyoued by the contributions of professor Mogens
Koktvedgaard, who as early as 1968 published his paper on "notes of
the general law of electronics" - a very early paper also in a
European perspective. It is fair to maintain that the activity of the
Danes inspired and guided work then just commencing in the other
Nordic countries, especially in Norway.
Professor Koktvedgaard has also, with the assistance of
other lecturers, been able to offer occational courses in computers
and law for Danish students. From 1983, this seems to have become a
permanent offer.
In the early Danish studies were included an experiment carried out
by I/S Datacentralen af 1959, a computer center of major importance in
Denmark, operated by the government, the municipalities of Copenhagen
and Fredriksberg, the National Organization of Local Authorities and
the Federation of County Councils.
The Danish experiment is described by Korenrup 1970:233-237, and
was based on the road traffic act, regulations on motor vehicles and
some related regulations. The software was a text retrieval system
[Page 331 ]
mainly developed by Datacentralen for retrieving information from
bibliographical services like Chemical titles and Chemical abstracts.
No service was born out of these efforts. The next major step was
taken in a four years study founded by the Danish Social Science
Research Council. The study was guided by professor Koktvedgaard, and
carried out by Sven Karnov - who has documented the results in a
series of reports (Karnov 1976-79). The study embraced a state of the
art study within the field of legal information services, a user
survey, and a limited experiment in cooperation with Datacentralen.
The first report (Karnov 1976) is a report on the state
of the art in a number of countries. The second (Karnov 1978) reports
on a user survey of Danish lawyers - one of the major European user
studies. The third report (Karnov 1979a) reports on an experiment
using a trial data base, alternatives form for conventional publishing
and the STATUS II text retrieval system. The final report (Karnov
1979b) is recommends the establishment of a computerized legal
information service in Denmark.
Again, the effort was quite exceptional in its systematic approach
and scope, but - again - the study ended four years later with no
concrete results in the form of operative systems.
At that time, however, Sven Karnov went to the Datacentralen, which
in 1982 launched their tax information service, DC-jura (cfr below).
Also Schultz, a private publishing house, launched its own
computerized indexing system, DATA LEX.
These efforts were, however, not felt to provide a satisfactory
frame of reference. The Department of Administration and the Ministry
of Justice consequently initiated a study on how to establish an
adequate organization for appropriate legal information services to
emerge. This lead to the establishment in 1982 of
Retsinformationsr&det - a council for legal information (after a
Norwegian model, which in turn was inspired by the Canadian CLIC
model). Chairman of this new Council is professor Mogens Koktvedgaard,
with the Ministry of Justice acting as secretariat.
[Page 332 ]
The Legal Information Council has as its objective to ensure
coordination and planning in respect of establishment and use of legal
information systems. It should also explore the problems related to
the use of new technology. At a later date the cabinet has also asked
the council to report on the technical, economic and legal aspects of
the establishment of a public service for statutory material -
including the possibilities for reducing the number of statuory
instruments in the process. The report is expected by the spring of
1984.
Though the two services DATA LEX and DC-jura has emerged, future
will probably confirm that the present Danish situation is unsettled.
7.8.2 DC-jura
Datacentralen (which is mentioned above in respect of the early
experiments) started the development of its information service within
the area of tax law in the beginning of 1981 (Karnov 1983:2).
| Adress: | | I/S
Datacentralen af 1959 |
Retortvej 6-8
DK-2500 VALBY - Denmark
The area of tax law was selected as it attracts a great deal of
attention, and was estimated to have a sufficient potential market. In
contrast to many other systems, Datacentralen aimed at giving its
service a full coverage within the interest area of tax lawyers. The
system was made available to users in 1982, and contains currently 8
files of a total of approximately 100 million characters.
Statutes, notifications and circulars as published by the official
gazettes (Lovtidende and Ministerialtidend) and non-published
circulars by the Central Tax Administration.
Administrative decisions - officially published decisions since
1970.
Court orders - official published orders from the Tax Tribunal
since 1977. A selection of earlier cases has been included.
[Page 333 ]
Court decisions - all cases on substative tax law since 1982
(digest from Skattekartoteket, see below). A selection of earlier
cases has been included.
Assessment Guidance - the guides published by the Internal Revenue
Department for individuals and companies (current version).
Quick Index and digests - references to periodicals, literature and
decisions of the central tax authorities and the Tax Tribunal. A
digest of approximately 12 million characters containing statutory
texts and headnotes of cases is being prepared for inclusion.
Bills - from the parliamentary year of 1982-83, all bills and
decisions of the parliament on tax law will be included.
Parliamentary debates - the current and last year's debates are
contained in the system.
The DC-jura documents the sources in authentic form (and from 1984
also those words initially defined as stop-words are included in the
search file).
Most of the files have been prepared by Datacentralen at its own
cost, but DC-jura also acts as the host for other information
providers. The file containing the quick index and the digest has been
made available by a private company, Skattekartoteket. In this way,
one has achieved an integrated system for computer retrieval and the
production of traditional books.
| Adress: | | A/S
Skattekartoteket |
Palægade 4
DK-1045 KØBENHAVN K - Danmark
The ambition of DC-jura is to extend the system to other areas of
law (Karnov 1983:2). A time schedule has not yet been announced, and
probably Datacentralen will look to the possible revenue of a service
before undertaking another heavy investment in data base
establishment.
The files are available through a user interface developed by
Datacentralen, and designed for IBM 3270 terminals, 3270 dial-up
terminals and TTY-terminals. The system itself is, from February 1984,
based on the BRS text retrieval system, with all commands in Danish.
[Page 334 ]
The BRS system is a US text retrieval system reported to
be strongly related to the IBM text retrieval system STAIRS, but
somewhat more efficient.
The DC-jura is available for outside users, and a flat tariff
related to connect time is applied. This rate is (February 1984) 400
DKR per hour.
7.8.3 DATA LEX
JH Schultz printers and publisher is more than 200 years old, being
one of the oldest private companies of Denmark. The company has for a
long time printed the legal gazettes and a number of other official
documents. This has created a need for keeping track of all the
different statutes, regulations etc. And in 1979, Schultz converted
their index to computerized form.
The index contains approximately 12.000 documents on statutes and
regulations, most documents only composed of indexing terms (25.000)
and titles, but a fraction (approximately 1.000) is available in full
text in the computerized system (Rasmussen 1983:9). Plans for the
future imply the extention to literature references and elaboration of
the indexing terms.
The system is developed on a Siemens BS2000, using the CODASYL data
base system UDS. Initially the user interface was not too friendly,
requiring prefixes and being quite limited in flexibility. It is
stated that by the autumn of 1983 the interface will permit "full text
search" (Rasmussen 1983:3). The system was initially developed as an
in-house system to assist Schultz in its service to book-sellers,
especially the "statutory information service centers" established by
booksellers across the country.
In 1982, the system was made available to outside users. It is
reported (Rasmussen 1983:2) that DATA LEX had 120 users in 1983, who
were connected to the system on an average of 17 minutes monthly. A
tariff structure of three groups (according to monthly use) is
adopted, the most favourable ones for users
[Page 335 ]
connected for more than 130 minutes monthly, the less favourable
for those connected for less than 60 minutes. The first group has to
pay a subscription and periodical fee, with a connect fee per hour of
267 DEK. The latter group does not have to pay subscription or
periodical fees, but the somewhat higher connect fee of 495 DEK per
hour.
[Page 336 ]
7.9 Finland
Finland is in many respects a remarkable country. It has two
official languages, one of them being Swedish, the other Finnish.
Finnish as a language is remotely related to Hungarian, and has
properties which make text retrieval difficult. For instance words are
inflected using prefixes, making the alphabetical sorting of inverted
files less effective and the useful technique of right hand truncation
problematic. Finland was for a long time united with Sweden, and the
Swedish legal system has left an imprint - like for instance the
famous principle of public access to government files introduced in
Finland at the same times as in Sweden - in the 17th century. Finland
maintains close cooperation with Sweden and the other Nordic
countries, though their language situation makes verbal communication
less of a matter of course than that between Danish, Norwegian and
Swedish languages - which are closely related.
Finland did actually start quite early developing a legal
information retrieval system. By the autumn of 1982, the then existing
Data Processing Committee of the Judicial Administration
(Justitiefoervaltningens ADB-kommission) established a working party
to explore the possible establishment of a legal information system. A
small grant (20.000 Finnish mark) was made available from the Ministry
of Finance, and the working party - chaired by the counsellor Heikki
Immonen - conducted experiments in Sweden (Hallberg 1972).
As material was used a number of statutes and a selection of
abstracts of decisions by the Supreme Administrative Court (Hoegsta
Foervaltningsdomstolen), altogether some 640.000 characters. The
experiments were conducted using IMDOC.
In 1973, further experiments were made at the research institution
for quantitative linguistics in Stockholm (KVAL), aimed at "term-
tuning" - ie developing computer-aided methods for achieving a
greater degree of consistency between the two parallel and
[Page 337 ]
authentic versions of statutory law, the Swedish and Finnish
version.
The Data Processing Commission reported in 1973, and based on this
report a nearly unique coordinated effort for developing computerized
systems within the area of responsibility of the Ministry of Justice
was initiated. A Data Systems Unit of the Ministry was founded in
March 1974 at Haemeenlinna, and this unit has gradually developed a
range of different systems. Within their scope of activities, also a
data bank of juidicature has been established - FINLEX.
| Adress: | | Ministry of Justice |
Data Systems Unit
PB 157
SF-13101 HAEMEENLINNA - Finland
FINLEX is based on the early work reported above, and the core of
the system is still the abstracts of the decisions by the
Administrative Supreme Court. The court did in 1978 take an initiative
for developing a better computerized information system, and the
Ministry of Justice once more established a working party, this time
with its chief executive, Eero J Manner, as the chairman. The working
party presented a general design for a legal information system in
1981.
Currently the FINLEX system contains 6 files (FINLEX 1982).
(1) Abstracts of the decisions of the Administrative
Supreme Court have been entered since early 1973 and is supplemented
by a number of earlier cases thought to be of sufficient intrest. The
core of the file is abstracts published in the annual compilations,
but also some unpublished abstracts are included. Entry into the
system is decided by the division of the court deciding the case. The
document includes a number code developed by the court itself. Most
documents are in Finnish only.
This file contains some 8.500 documents, of which 4.000
are related to taxation. An annual growth of 600 documents is
estimated.
[Page 338 ]
(2) The second file consists of the decisions by the
Supreme court. It goes back to 1926, based on three publications - two
general edited compilations of the decisions of the court, and a
special compilation of decisions in divisions of land. These three
publications cover the period 1926-79, and in 1982 the court started
supplementing the file by entering its decisions directly. Altogether
this file includes approximately 8.900 documents with an annual growth
of 100-150 decisions. Most of the decisions are in Finnish only.
(3) The third file is to contain decisions by the appeal
courts as brief abstracts. In 1982, this was still in planning, and
contained only 185 abstracts of decisions by the Helsinki appeal court
with respect to rental of houses and apartments.
(4) The fourth file contains the decisions of the Labour
court, starting 1981. This system also includes responsa given by the
court on request from other courts. Titles are entered in Swedish and
Finnish, and a capture of historical titles is planned. Annual growth
is 200 documents.
(5) The fifth file contains decisions of the land
property court. The file consentrates on recent cases, but some older
cases have been included. Annual growth is estimated to be in the
range of some dozens.
(6) The sixth file is a case citator, citing all legal
literature in the period 1926-1978 where a case has been discussed or
mentioned. Not only cases in a strict sence have been included, but
also decisions from the responsa and reports of the constitution
committee of the parliament and the industrial relations council. The
file is based on a Finnish publication, but it is stated that the
computerized file will be maintained independently of this.
(7) The seventh file, FINTREAT, contains formatted
information on the treaties of which Finland is a party, based on the
index of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The index contains some 600
bilateral and 300 multilateral treaties.
[Page 339 ]
Plans for extension of the system (Ministry of Justice 1983)
include the index of the Diet documents through a cooperation between
the library of the parliament and the Ministry of Justice. The
decisions of the Assurance Tribunal and the legal decisions of the
Market Court will also be included. Through a joint working party
composed of representatives of the Finnish Law Society (Finlands
juristfoerbund) and the Ministry of Justice (with chief of planning,
Juhani Ahla as the chairman) an integrated approach for capturing
legal literature at the source has been proposed.
Initially, the Swedish retrieval system IMODC was emplyed, but
currently the Finnish retrieval program MINTU is being employed. This
has not been sufficiently powerful, and in 1982 the Ministry of
Justice started experiments based on the IBM text retrieval system
STAIRS. In parallel, thesauri are being developed, both a synonym
thesaurus (including Finnish-Swedish synonyms), and a systematic
thesaurus. A final switch of software has not yet been reported.
The FINLEX system is primarily aimed at the needs of the courts,
the legislative bodies, the public administration, the universities
and for research purposes. Private organizations or lawyers may,
however, subscribe to the system. A final tariff policy has yet to
emerge, subscribers have so far paid only for the processing costs at
the Government Computing Center, which is operating the system.
Subscribers contract directly with the Ministry of Justice.
[Page 340 ]
7.10 France
7.10.1 Introduction
French lawyers are renowned for their systematic approach to legal
problems, consequently it is not surprising to find one of the
international pioneers in the French lawyer Lucien Mehl. He was one of
the first to recognize the possibilities offered to the lawyers by the
computer (Tapper 1973:196). In the 1950ies he discussed these
possibilities in a number of papers. These early papers, however,
focused on deontic systems rather than information retrieval systems,
in much the same way as in the United States at that time. But Lucien
Mehl also became the founder of one of the more important French legal
information retrieval services - that of CEDIJ.
Though Lucien Mehl was perhaps the first, he was by no means the
only French lawyer to become fascinated by the computer at a rather
early date. In the middle of the 1960ies, professor Pierre Catala
started his work at the University of Montpellier, which led to the
establishment of IRETIJ (see below).
In fact there seems to be a profusion of projects in legal
informatics during the 1960ies, Kornerup (1969:2) reports that by the
end of the decade, projects had been initiated at 16 different
institutions. This is a parallel of the situation in the United States
at the time - but the French have been more persistent. Also today
there are a large number of interesting projects - stimulated perhaps
by the prevailing French policy giving priority to research in
computers and computerized services, or telematique.
The French did not duplicate the US projects or solutions. There
was a tendency in the US to opt for systems exploiting authentic
texts, while in France there has been a tendency to favour systems
relying more heavily on indexing. A possible explanation of this
diverging development is suggested by Kornerup (1969:2). He points out
that the system of legal
[Page 341 ]
education in France produces a great number of well qualified
lawyers available at university institutions, while the university
computer centers at the beginning of the 1970ies tended to be of a
rather modest size. In the period when most projects were initiated,
it was easier to have material intellectually indexed than to have
available an adequate computer for the processing of the rather large
volumes of data required by a solution based on the authentic texts.
One early and quite interesting experimental project will
be briefly mentioned. In the beginning of the 1970ies the system
DARIUS was designed to provide an interesting hybrid function, Buff
elan 1972. The project was undertaken by the Institut de recherche
d'informatique juridique at the Universite de Paris-Sud (directed by
professor Jean-Paul Buff elan), but discontinued in 1973. The
system was terminal oriented, the user conducted his search through
indexing terms. These indexes were displayed on the terminal, and the
user employed a light pen to select terms. In the same way, the terms
might be combined by Boolean operators.
The documents identified through the search request were
retrieved by accessing a microform bank, and the microform
representation was scanned by a camera and projected on the same
terminal.
This system was originally developed by Pierre Riviere, a
civil engineer concerned with the retrieval of maps and images. It is
obvious that this intermarriage of computer and microform techniques
deserve some interest - which may be enhanced even today when the
microform bank may be replaced by a video disk.
A system using a Kodak microfiche retrieval method,
permitting simple Boolean search request for the indexing terms
represented in Kodak "miracode" on the fiches, has been operated by
the Centre de documentation automatisee du droit (CEDAD). The project
was the result of a cooperation between three publishers, Dalloz,
Fracis Lefevbre and Gazette du Palais, and La Societe Juridique et
Fiscale de France. Technical Report II 1978:58
[Page 342 ]
seems to imply that this would be marketed as a
computerized service, but the activity was discontinued in 1980.
There is no French journal devoted to legal information systems or
computers and law in general, but an international bibliography is
published by the Centre de documentation sciences humaines (part of
the structure established by Centre national de la recherche
scientifique). Informatique et sciences juridiques appeared
with its first volume in 1974, and have since 1979 appeared twice a
year. The computerized service based on this bibliography is known as
ISJ (FRANCIS), ISJ being an abbreviation for Informations et Services
Juridiques. The CDSH uses a special suite of programs permitting the
production of bibliographies, selective distribution of information
and online retrieval (SPLEEN 1-3) in addition to MISTRAL.
Retrospective bibliographies on selected subjects are produced on
request. Some 5.000 documents are currently available, Barbet
1982:40-41.
| Adress: | | Centre de documentation |
sciences humaines (CDSH)
54, boulevard Raspail
F-75270 PARIS Cedex 06 - France
One should also emphasize that CNRS has supported a number of
pertinent and relevant research activities, for instance the research
of Daniele Bourcier on the legal language and its implications for
legal information retrieval systems. An experiemental system drawing
on such research, and relying on computational linguistics, SPIRIT, is
briefly discussed above at sect 5.3.2.
Actually, the development in France started in 1967-68 with - among
the other initiatives - a working group which published a study titled
"Pour une organisation nationale de l'information juridique". This
national organization was not realized, but the group felt that the
great number of rather independent projects were apt to divide the
resources within the field of legal informatics - to a greater extent
than was desirable, some thought. In order to achieve a better
coordination between the different projects, the organization ADIJ
(Association Francaise pour le development de l'informatique
juridique) was founded in 1970 (Barbet 1978:1). This would not seem,
[Page 343 ]
however, to have had the desired effect - though some of its
activities are reported on by Barbet 1978:19-20.
Barbet complains (1983:12-13) of the unsatisfactory publication
ratio of data bases both in time and jurisdictions, and (1982:45)
observes:
"On constante un certain nombre de sources memorisees
plusieurs fois; c'est le cas notamment des lois et des arrets publics
de la Cour de Cassation. Par contre, la jurisprudence de nombreuses
Cours d'Appel commencent seulment a etre prise en consideration et les
juridictions du premiere degres sont trop ignorees. ... Globalement,
il faut souligner l'effort considerable fait pour permettre l'acces a
l'information inedite. En quelgues annees, le juriste a pu decouvrir
des centaines de milles de documents jusqu'alors totalement ignorees
permettant un approfondissement important de la connaissance
juridique."
Perhaps not everybody shares the view that access to thousands of
new sources will improve the quality of legal decisions (this has been
discussed above in part I), but the profusion of French systems
certainly is still characteristic of the situation. Also, there is a
concern in France in respect to the decisions of the intermediate
courts - the number of decisions of the Cours d'Appel has increased by
50 per cent over the last half of the 1970ies, and only some 3 per
cent of their decisions are published, distributed in more than 100
journals (Cedia undated).
As a result of this, the Ordre des avocats a la cour de Paris
organized a Centre de documentation et d'informatique (Cedia), of
which Louis Barbet is an enthusiastic director, in 1981. This
intermediary service has access to CEDIJ, JURIS-DATA, LEX, SYDONI and
CELEX, planning to include all available information services in
France, and including the exhaustive library of the Ordre. In 1982,
Cedia paid for 2.000 hours of interrogation of computerized services
(Barbet 1983:18), and the cost of one question was 600 French francs
(of which the Ordre des avocats pays 500 for members).
One may foresee that Cedia will organize user needs, that similar
initiatives will be taken elsewhere, and
[Page 344 ]
that user requirements will be put forward resulting in - perhaps
- a future coordination.
Ordre des advocats a la cour de Paris
Palais de justice - 4 bd du palais
F-75055 PARIS RP - France
At the moment also the French ministry of Justice seems to take a
stronger interest. The commission which was formed in order to keep
the ministry oriented on the CEDIJ activity, was reorganized 15 June
1979 (Journal Officiel of 26 June 1979 NC 5351) as a permanent
secretariat. The current president (1984) is JM Sauve, Directeur de
l'administration generale et de l'equipment of the Ministry of
Justice. The secretariat has taken the initiative to develop
educational material for users, and aids for courts. (Cfr Riolacci
1983.) The ministry has started distributing terminals to courts and
other organizations within its field of responsibility.
Gibert (1983b:30) mentions that this policy started in
1981, a total of 55 terminals being installed at the end of 1983 in
different jurisdictions: Cours d'Appel, Conseil des Prud'hommes and
tribunaux d'instance.
The Ministry has specified an "oecumenique" terminal with function
keys and the possibility of accessing different services (at lest
CEDIJ, LEX, JURIS-DATA, and SYDONI). An initiative has been taken to
develop a specialized intelligent terminal for legal information
retrieval in order to facilitate the user interface (Charpenel 1983,
especially page 4 and Stoliaroff 1983:3).
7.10.2 IRETIJ
The first documentation center to emerge in France, was established
within a university environment. In 1965 at the Universite de
Montpellier in the south of France, professor Pierre Catala from the
law faculty and profesor Falgueirettes from the science faculty
organized a working group in order to develop a legal information
system. In 1967, the work was organized
[Page 345 ]
in the Centre d'etudes pour le traitement de l'information
juridique (CETIJ). This was in 1968 given support by the Centre
national de la recherce scientifique (CNRS), the French research
council. The same year, CETIJ was transformed into a university
institute, Institut de recherces et d'etudes pour le traitement de
l'information juridique (IRETIJ), governed jointly by the faculty of
law and the faculty of science. From the start IRETIJ has been
financed partly by the university, partly by CNRS, and partly through
research contracts. IRETIJ has an impressive network of international
contacts, which is oriented mainly towards latin-speaking countries.
39, rue de l'Universite
F-34060 MONTPELLIER CEDEX - France
Professor Pierre Catala, who has now moved to Paris, is still the
president of the institute, and very much active within the field of
computers and law. The director in Montpellier is Michel Bibent, whose
doctoral thesis L'informatique applique a la jurisprudence
(Montpellier 1972) is on the IRETIJ system.
One of the interesting aspects of the work of IRETIJ, is the policy
of documentation adopted. In France there are 32 cours d'appel, which
annually decides some 100.000 civil and some 55.000 criminal cases.
Until 1940, case reports were published for most of these courts.
Today, there exists only two series, one for the court of appeal in
Paris, another for that in Grenoble. Altogether ten courts actually
publish reports, though irregulary.
The lack of a systematic publishing was felt as a problem, not
least by the universities, Bibent 1968:665. Consequently several
universities considered to create their own documentation services in
order to remedy this fault in the legal information system. Actually,
only the universities at Montpellier and Rennes maintain such centers.
Similar activities have been performed in several
univesities. In addition to those of Montpellier and Rennes, Gibert
(1983b:14-15) mention the Institut d'Etudes Judiciaires of the
University of Aix-en-Provence (concentrating on the decisions of
the Cour d'Appel d'Aix-en-Provence); Institut
[Page 346 ]
de Recherche Economique et de Planification at the
University of Grenoble (in respect to decisions of the Cour d'Appel de
Grenoble); centre d'etudes judiciaires of the University of Pau (in
respect to decisions by the Court d'Appel de Pau); and L'institut de
Recherche en Informatique Juridique at the University of Sceaux (which
publish a journal, Jurindex, containing an index to French
jurisprudence and doctrince since 1971.
The work of IRETIJ centered mainly on decisions of the appeal
courts, though initially it set out to document the decisions of the
Cour de Cassation. By the end of 1971, the IRETIJ system already
included some 47.000 documents with an annual growth of 11.000
documents (Berger 1972:67-68). The objective of IRE-TIJ is eventually
to cover principally regional case law, complemented by national case
law and literature (Barbet 1982:39).
Currently the data base comprises decisions from the Cour de
cassation (civil chamber from 1960, criminal chamber from 1970);
decisions from Cour de Montpellier (from 1969), Cour de Nimes (from
1971), and other published case law (from 1973). Also 50 journals have
been analysed since 1973, and a selection of ministerial responsa has
been included since 1968. Altogether, the data base contains some
130.000 documents (Barbet 1982:42-43 - Gibert 1983b:139 mention the
figure 150.000 documents with an annual increase of 10.000).
The retrieval programs have been developed by IRETIJ itself,
initially by professor Filiatre - whose doctoral thesis is also a
product of the project (Conception et realisation d'un systeme de
documentation automatique pour la Jurisprudence, Montpellier
1970). From 1974, the retrieval program has been known as JURIDOC. It
allows the use of Boolean and distance operators, as well as "value
operators" for the quantitative data analysis (Technical Study II
1977:31).
It has been reported that the programs will be revised
and recoded in PL/1, but not whether this has taken place (Technical
Study II 1978:58).
The IRETIJ system is available on a dial-up terminal, or through
the French packet switching network
[Page 347 ]
TRANSPAC. Costs were reported in 1977 to be 150 French francs per
question, but pricing structure may have changed when switching to an
online system.
The retrieval programs were initially based on an indexing
philosophy (Bibent 1968:666-667), as authentic texts would have made
retrieval strategies more complex and problematic. The documents are
composed of the keywords assigned to the decision on publication. A
brief description of the original version and method used by IRETIJ is
given by Loehr 1969.
The decisions were published with a short abstract. A comparative
performance test in 1968-69 gave - on the basis of 38 search requests
- a slightly better result for the abstracts than for intellectually
assigned indexing terms. IRETIJ did not at that occasion test the
combination of indexing terms and abstracts, even though these would
complement each other in a retrieval system, the keyword being of a
relevant nature and well suited for retrieval, the abstracts of a
specific nature and well suited for relevance assessment (Berger
1972:75). By utilizing additional indexing terms from the references,
however, the recall ratio was brought up from 36 to 51.
Still IRETIJ was not satisfied with the recall capabilities of its
system. Analysing the causes for performance failure, IRETIJ
determined that these were mainly due to inexhaustive indexing, and
partly due to a lack of uniform terminology and structure. In order to
overcome these obstacles, IRETIJ developed their own guidelines for
indexing legal documents. These guidelines were published 1969-70.
Using them, IRETIJ prepared their own documents of 99 decisions by the
Cour de Cassation. In a comparative performance test, this gave a
recall of 63 per cent in contrast to the 51 per cent obtained when
using the keywords assigned on publication.
Each document is represented by 30-100 indexing terms (Technical
Study II 1977:29). There is a set of document types, and for each type
an "analysis structure" has been established, indicating the
interesting "points of view". The expert analyser specifies these
"points of view" using indexing terms, on which a formal structure is
imposed (corresponding to sentences and paragraphs), supply
bibliographical references and - for the literature - a summary. On
updating
[Page 348 ]
in batch, certain automatic controls are carried out.
The result is a document different from the original short abstract
mentioned above, and generally considered to be of a high quality.
In evaluating the effort and emphasis which IRETIJ put on
developing adequate indexing methods, one may become critical, Berger
1972:79-80, Haft 1970:146. But pragmatic factors may have made it
difficult to choose another way of improving system performance, and
the work on indexing may be of some value in itself.
When documents are loaded, the terms of the documents are replaced
by a five digit code (numeros de notion). This is done automatically.
The dictionary assigns the same code to all different grammatical
variations of a word, and also to the specified synonyms. One also
operates with what is known as a general term (notion generale), which
covers words sharing a word stem, like for instance "commerce" (with
grammatic derivations), "commercant", "commercial", "commercialite",
Berger 1972:86-87. The codes of such clusters have identical first
four digits, while the last digit varies.
In 1972 this input thesaurus contained 18.000 different word forms.
There were 5.000 general terms, and counting the different terms in
such clusters as well, there were 8.000 different codes.
The codes are loaded into an inverted file, and the search requests
are matched against this file. The user does not have to use the
codes, but can use words which - through the thesaurus - are
translated into the appropriate codes. Terms in the search request may
be combined by Boolean operators, and also distance operators. On the
retrieval of documents, the user may specify futher requests which
will utilize data contained in the text file rather than the inverted
file.
The role of IRETIJ within France would seem to have been important.
The commercial legal information retrieval service JURIS-DATA was
initiated through cooperation with IRETIJ, and the specialized service
on industrial property law of the Institut nationale de la propriete
industrielle has likewise been
[Page 349 ]
formulated in cooperation with IRETIJ. Today, IRETIJ maintains
close contact also with a number of foreign centers, and the Mexican
UNAM-JURE is established on the basis of IRETIJ experiences.
7.10.3 CEDIJ
In 1960, Lucien Mehl published a paper advocating a national center
for legal information services ("Les sciences juridiques devant
l'automation", Cybernetica 1960:22-40, 142-1760). Six years
later he got the opportunity to attempt realizing his plan when
Conseil d'etat (where Mehl was conseiller d'etat) allowed him the
assistance of Jean-Marie Breton (then working with the Service central
organisation en methodes) for one year. During this year, a survey of
existing systems was completed, and a plan for future development was
put forward.
In 1967 a working group was established, financed by the ministry
of justice (Centre de coordination des recherches). This group
produced a thesaurus of words based on the vocabulary of Code general
des impots and the decisions of Conseil d'etat in tax law cases in the
period 1935- 54, Breton/Mehl 1972:130.
In May 1968 the working group started tests using the IBM program
DPS (Document Processing System) on the computer installation of
Institut national de la statistique et des etudes economiques (INSEE),
and in July 1968 the first statutes were computerized.
In 1969, the working group adopted the name CEDIJ (Cente de
recherche et developpement en informatique juridique). The tests with
DPs continues, and CEDIJ began developing their own retrieval program,
to become known as DOCILIS (Documents, interrogation libres).
Immeuble "International"
2, rue Stephenson
F-78181 SAINT-QUINTIN-EN-YVELINES CEDEX
France
Though independent, CEDIJ still maintained a link with
the ministry of justice. A commission was
[Page 350 ]
created to keep the ministry informed on the CEDIJ
developments, and was represented in the administrative council of
CEDIJ. In the period of 1973-1982, the ministry has supported CEDIJ by
34 million French francs, Charpenel 1983:2.
In April 1970 CEDIJ became independent, organized as a non-profit
company. At the same time it became operational as a documentation and
research center, devoting its effort to theoretical and applied
research (Breton/Mehl 1972:130). Members of the new organization were
Conseil d'etat, Cour de cassation, Cour des Comptes, the ministries of
finance and internal affairs and the parliament. CEDIJ established
cooperation with other centers, most notably the Quebec DATUM project,
to which a satellite link was forged in 1976.
CEDIJ has always had a strong research aspect to its
activities, and Gibert (1983b:121) mention that the Laboratoire
d'Informatique et de Droit International (LIDI) is associated with
CEDIJ.
CEDIJ included in its data base legislation and case law. A source
may be represented by authentic text or by an abstract or a set of
indexing terms. As to legislation, the authentic text is registered.
In respect to case law, initially an abstract is registered, being on
average one tenth of the length of the source (Breton/Rave 1972:33).
At present, however, CEDIJ enters the authentic text of decisions by
the Conceil d'etat and the Cour de cassasion in addition to the
abstract. Emphasis was put on fixed fields of bibliographic data - as
much as 53 fields were associated to each document (Tapper 1973:197).
Examples are given by Breton 1969.
CEDIJ maintains its own data bases, but also data bases for other
organizations (for instance the parliament). A survey of potential
users in 1977 is reported to have had a certain impact - for instance
greater emphasis on increasing the publication ratio of its data bases
(cfr Technical Study II 1978:57).
In 1972 the data base comprised some 50.000.000 characters, and by
1975 it was expected to include 250.000 decisions (Tapper 1973:197).
Barbet (1982:38) reports, however, that the data base contains only
some 200.000 documents, while Gibert (1983b:121)
[Page 351 ]
reports 500.000 documents of altogether 500 million characters,
with an annual growth of 150-170 million characters.
The data base is divided into three parts, for case law,
legislation and literature. In addition, there is a data base for
parlimentary documents.
The case law data base contains currently (1982) the decisions of
Conseil constitutionnel; Tribunal des conflicts (since 1973); Conseil
d'etat (fiscal since 1955, general since 1970 and expropriation and
urbanisation since 1967); Cour de cassasion (civil, commercial and
social chambers since 1966, criminal chamber since 1970, decision in
labour law since 1960 and fiscal law since 1955 - non published cases
since 1970; decisions of the Cour d'appel de Versailles (since 1977),
Cour d'appel de Aix-en-Provence (since 1975) and decisions published
in the major journals since 1980.
At present (1982) the legislative data base contains bilateral tax
treaties (including authentic texts of extracts); tax law (both
statutes and regulations of sales, company and personal tax,
registration taxes, property tax, municipality taxation etc); business
law (certain procedures concerning liquidation etc, company law,
contractual law, trade regulation, and consumer protection; social
law (labour law, social aid and security law, and health law;
expropriation; construction and building law; environmental law, law
on trading with public agencies; law on the organization of local
public administration, law of procedures for public administration,
and defence law.
The data base of legal literature contains currently (1982)
references on papers published in 50 journals (since 1970) and case
notes in the literature.
For retrieval, CEDIJ originally used the IBM program DPS. In its
original version DPS was not terminal oriented, but an auxilliary
program developed by INSEE for Observatoires economique regionaux
called SPHYNX made online retrieval possible.
In 1974 CEDIJ switched to the IBM text retrieval program STAIRS.
This is a state of the art text retrieval program, permitting
exploitation of fixed field through an additional data base structure,
and
[Page 352 ]
with a full range of Boolean operators for the text retrieval. It
also has distance operators and ranking functions (quite similar to
those of the Canadian QL/SEARCH, to which it is also related).
Browsing functions are well developed, permitting highlighting. It is
reported that CEDIJ has adapted STAIRS for its use (Technical Report
II 1977:15, 17). Part of this adaption is the translation of STAIRS
messages to French. The more user friendly interface seems to be known
as BRS, and has been available for CEDIJ since December 1982
(Stoliaroff 1983:2).
STAIRS interfaces with an additional program known as TLS, which
permits the establishment of thesaurus. structures and grammatic
generators. This is used to implement the work done by CEDIJ on
computational linguistics, which is one of the most valuable
contributions of its research. As mentioned, CEDIJ emphasized from the
beginning, supporting programs to increase performance, these being
known as DOCILIS.
The initial thesaurus contained two segments; one for legal terms,
another for non-legal terms. The non-legal segment is further divided
into a general and a specific subsection. And these two subsections,
as well as the legal segment, is further divided into four categories,
three which correspond to functional categories (entities, biens,
evenements) and one rest cathegory (synthetique).
Words in the basic categories are hierarchically organized; words
with several meanings may consequently be found in different
hierarchical structures. The paradigmatic relations between words are
registered and entered into the system, giving a listing of
grammatical variations, syntactical substitutions, and quasi-synonyms.
These substitutions are made automatically by the system, using the
terms of the search request as input. In 1975 the list of grammatical
variations had 11.000 entries, the list of syntactical substitutes had
6.500 entries, and the list of quasi-synonyms had 4.500 entries. The
list of grammatical variations is incomplete, as it includes only
terms with different meanings. Otherwise grammatical variations are
gererated by a special support program, GRAMMATIC.
CEDIJ also has tried to tackle recall failure, which may originate
by implicity of the authentic text.
[Page 353 ]
This is done by inserting words representing the implied ideas or
concepts in the document between asterisks. Also words not included in
the source, but used as an indexing term in manually prepared indexes
(as may be found in a case reporter) are inserted in the same way. In
addition, it is found that the table of contents in a book may include
terms of a higher generality, which consequently is of some use in
reducing the specificity of the document.
Another set of routines aims at reducing precision failure. One
strategy has been to make polusemes and homgraphs explicit. The
problem of homographs are often somewhat magnified in French, as many
computers do not have character sets sufficently wide to represent
accent, for instance the word form "greve" will represent both the
word with an accant grave for the first "e" and the accent aigy for
the last "e" etc, Kornerup 1969, Berger 1972. A term making the actual
interpretation of the polyseme or homograph explicit is manually
inserted in the document between asterisks.
As the reader will have noticed, this book is produced by
a printer having a very limited range of accents, and many excellent
examples of the defiency mentioned above may be found in the text.
French is a language which forms compounded words in the same way
as English, by stringing words together using common words. It was
found that such phrases reduced the precision of text retrieval
because they were difficult to define - for instance the phrase
"chemin de fer" (railway) would reduce the precision in respect to
search requests containing only the idea represented by the term
"chemin" (road) or the idea represented by the term "fer" (iron). This
was to some degree resolved by reducing the phrase to a syntetic word,
for instance "chemin-de-fer". Care has been taken, however, in order
not to lose information (and consequently risking recall failure)
through exaggerated use of synthetic words.
Originally, a question was communicated to CEDIJ in natural
language, and transformed into a search request of DPS format by one
of the CEDIJ staff. It was estimated that some 20 minutes were
necessary for the construction of search requests.
[Page 354 ]
This did, of course, change when CEDIJ switched to STAIRS, which is
truly terminal oriented. Terminals may be connected by dial-up or
through the French packet-switched network TRANSPAC. In 1980, three
courts was connected by terminal - the Cour de cassasion, the Conseil
d'etat, and the Tribunal de Nanterre. Later (1981-82) terminals have
been distributed to the appeal courts and some profession schools.
Average monthly usage was 4 hours in the period June 1981 - December
1982 (Charpenel 1983:2-3).
The Cour de cassasion has actually reorganized its routines for its
Service de documentation et d'orientation in order to exploit the
CEDIJ data base of the court's decisons in a systematic way - in order
to make more rational developments in case law. This is to start in
the chamber of social law July 1983, and to be extended to the other
chambers in 1984 (cfr Leo/Bergeron 1983).
The CEDIJ current tariff (1982) is based on actual connect time to
the system, on a scale starting on 570 French francs per hour if
connected less than 5 hours per month, and decreasing to 460 francs
per hour if connected more than 50 hours per month. For synchronous
terminals, the tariff is 100 francs higher. An answering service is
available for 400 franc per question.
Reports of 1983 indicate that the services of CEDIJ are
available through the organization C-CAM, using the BRS text retrieval
system (which is related to STAIRS) at the rates mentioned above.
Tour Montparnasse
33, Avenue du Maine
F-75755 PARIS CEDEX 15 - France
The result is given in a number of alternative formats. In 1971
CEDIJ processed about 100 questions a month (Breton/Rave 1972:55), in
1976 this figure was up to 150 questions a month.
Several tests of the performance of the CEDIJ system are known. In
an early phase of the system (1970), recall was estimated to be less
than 50 per cent, but
[Page 355 ]
during 1971 - with the support of the DOCILIS programs - this was
improved to 85 per cent. With respect to the Conseil d'etat the
thesaurus was not at that time satisfactory, and a sample taken
1970-71 of 42 question gave a recall of 42 per cent. In the same
period, 57 questions directed at the documents composed of Code des
impots gave a recall of 84 per cent. It was expected to reach a recall
of beyond 93 per cent when DOCILIS routines were perfected,
Breton/Rave 1972:56.
The reduction of recall failure was given priority over reduction
of precision failure. In 1970, precision was estimated to be less than
40 per cent, while it was expected that through the DOCILIS support,
it might be brought up to 80 per cent.
As always, performance figures in recall and precision
ratios should be critically assessed, as it is doubtful whether this
is a measure appropriate for total or general system
performance.
7.10.4 SYDONI
In France, the notaries have an important place in the legal
system. This became more apparent in 1959 when a reform removed civil
servants from the districts, leaving the notary as the most
approachable lawyer. The reform magnified the already severe problems
created by deficiencies in the legal information system, and the
notaries set up - on a co-operative basis - what were to be called
Centres de recherches d'information et de documentation notaires
(CRIDON), Haft 1970:128, Chamoux 1969:4-5. The first of the CRIDONs
was established in Lyon, but other followed in Paris, Lille, Bordaux,
and Nantes (Barbet 1978:8).
The computerization started in Lyon, but it has been introduced in
other CRIDONs, and is reported to have developed into a national
system.
The CRIDON de Lyon was founded in 1962. A mechanical peek-a-boo
system SELECTO was organized in order to facilitate legal research
(Technical Study II 1977:20). In principle the step from mechanical to
[Page 356 ]
computerized systems is rather short, and in 1969 CRIDON de Lyon
- in cooperation with mathematicians and linguistics from the
university of Grenoble - started to develop a legal information
system, Systeme de documentation notariale informatisee (SYDONI).
There were also cooperation with IRETIJ at Montpellier (Law and
Computer Technology 12/1968:12). The project is supported by the
ministry of industry (Charpenel 1983:2). From 1981, a liaison with the
Conseil superieur de notariat has been made, the authority responsible
of legal information policy (cfr Technical Study II 1978:57).
SYDONI is today (1983) a commercial service based on the
cooperation between the CRIDON de Lyon and the publishers Dalloz and
Francis Lefebvre as well as a large number of other organizations
(Gibert 1983b:179). It is made available by one of the principal
carries of France (Gibert 1983b:179 gives this as C-CAM SORINFOR).
1, rue du Boccador
F-75008 PARIS - France
The project was revised in 1972, and programs were then developed
by the service burau EURINFORM CISI into a more advanced version for
an IRIS (a CII Honeywell Bull computer). SYDONI is also employing the
MISTRAL text retrieval system of CII Honeywell Bull, which is briefly
characterized in the section on the European Communities, and is using
a CII Honeywell Bull computer. This is supplemented by the SUMER (an
acronym for Systeme universel de memorisation et de recherche) of
EURINFORM allowing for extra functions, like online updating
(Technical Study II 1977:20). It also has a very simple search
language, not permitting complex Boolean arguments.
The point of departure of this system was a list of descriptors
characterizing the sources. Rather than adopting a numerical code for
each indexing term, CRIDON de Lyon compressed the indexing term to an
unambiguous alphabetical form. Thus "abadon" became "aba", and
"abattement" became "...tt". To each indexing term was attached a
decriptive field (zone descriptive), in which the relations of the
term with other terms was specified: synonymity (singular and plural,
derivations, context-independent synonyms,
[Page 357 ]
and synonyms decided by the SYDONI staff), and hierarchical
relations. Word forms in synonym groups or hierarchical structures are
treated as combined by a logical or. This field also contained the
addresses of the documents in which the term occurred. In 1977 the
thesaurus was of 8.200 entries, and was given this characteristic by
the Technical Study II 1977:22:
(The thesaurus) "... is neither powerful enough or
complete enough, nor familiar enough, nor easy enough to use".
The study did add, however, that a new version of MISTRAL would
provide the possibility of online thesaurus consultation. A discussion
of the thesaurus may be found in Mignot/Cledes 1978a:10-12.
The documents were converted from the earlier mechanical system to
the computerized system. Through the work with this conversion a
certain conceptualization took place, creating logical documentation
units (unites logiques de documentation) which constitute the
metalanguage of SYDONI. Through this the search may be limited to
documents of a certain category, or to special subjects - Haft
1970:131.
The objective of SYDONI is to cover the whole legal system, and at
the moment, the data base contains some 100.000 documents (170
millions characters). These include the most important legislative
instruments (though the data base is inclomplete in fiscal and
economic law); all published case law supplemented by unpublished
decisions and selections from literature as published in 200 journals
(Barbet 1982:40-43).
The five CRIDONs cooperate in constructing the documents, and at
each of them SYDONI is available 8 hours a day, Mignot/Cledes
1978a:3,4. A discussion of the user groups and uses of SYDONI can be
found in Mignot/Cledes 1978b.
In addition, it should be mentioned that SYDONI makes available to
its users "flashs quotidiens d'informations" through the French
teletex service Teletel (Gibert 1983a:12).
[Page 358 ]
7.10.5 JURIS-DATA
Editions techniques is a French publisher specialized on books and
journals for professionals, publishing for instance the Juris-
Classeur for lawyers. In 1969, the company conducted its first
study on the feasability of making a computerized, legal information
service (Nectoux 1978:1). Professor Pierre Catala was engaged as a
consultant, and JURIS-DATA developed a retrieval system based on a
copy of the JURI-DOC system of IRETIJ, Montpellier. The system became
operational 1972-73 (Nectoux 1978:1, Technical Study II 1977:35) and
accessible to the public in October 1973 (Barbet 1978:13).
123, rue d'Alesia
F-75678 PARIS CEDEX 14 - France
Professor Catala is retained as one of the six directors of
Editions Techniques. Another is Jean-Pierre Chamoux, an influential
figure within the French community working on computers and law. He
has also founded the private research organization Droit &
informatique, which has undertaken research in this area,
especially in respect to transnational data flows and information law.
| Adress: | | Droit
& informatique |
5, rue du Captaine Scott
F-75015 PARIS - France
In its original form, the JURIS-DATA system was employed by mid-
users. Currently, however, end-users may connect to the service
through dial-up terminals or the French packet-switching network
TRANSPAC. Today, there are probably considerable differences between
the JURIS-DATA retrieval system and JURIDOC. It is, for instance,
reported that JURIS-DATA automatically expands words by
singulars-plurals and masculinumfemininum (Stoliaroff 1983:5).
JURIS-DATA employs an IRIS 80 Cii Honeyewell Bull and also has
availbale MISTRAL.
JURIS-DATA emphasize a careful preparation of the documents to be
included in the data base, a philosophy corresponding to that of
IRETIJ.
[Page 359 ]
The data base currently (1982) constitutes some 200.000 documents
from the Cour de cassasion (civil, commercial, social and criminal
chambers, the thre first since 1960, the last since 1972), Conseil
d'etat (published decisions from 1972, from 1980 also unpublished
decisions), unpublished cases from Cour d'appel de Paris (from 1972)
and provincial appeal courts (from 1980), and some other case law. As
much as 58 journals (from 1970) are analysed and the decisions and
literature of these are included. Also selected ministerial responsa
from the Journal Officiel since 1970. (Cfr Barbet 1982:39-43
and JURIS-DATA promotional material of 1982.)
The greatest interest of the JURIS-DATA's service concerns its
documentation of unpublished decisions by the Cour d'appel de Paris.
JURIS-DATA emphasize its complementary nature to the services of a
traditional legal publisher. For instance is emphasized that the
analysis of journals permits access to the citations of any case
discussed in these (Nectoux 1978:4), and the possibility of producing
what Nectoux (1978:15-16) calls "Dossiers JURIS-DATA". These are
edited compilations of case law etc based on an important question,
furnished with a summary and an alphabetical "back-of-the-dossier"
index by JURIS-DATA (employing some of the other computer programs of
Editions Techniques, giving a "vue panoramique" of the legal system.
These have proved especially important for decisions by the Cour
d'appel de Paris, whose decisions are not available otherwise.
7.10.6 LEXIS
LEXIS has been available in France since 1982, through the company
Tele Consulte (affiliated with the general French publisher Hachette),
based on a similar arrangement as Mead Data Central has with
Butterworths Telepublishing in Great Britain.
44, rue du Four
F-75006 PARIS - France
[Page 360 ]
LEXIS has as an objective to offer a complete service, and though
quite new in France, the massive experience and resources of its US
relation is backing the venture.
Therefore, the data base already contains some 200.000 court
decisions (published and unpublished) and the last 20 years of
statutes and decrets. This comprises the Cour de cassasion (civil,
social and commercial chambers since 1959, criminal chamber since
1970), Tribunal des conflits (since 1964), Conceil constitutionnel,
Conseil d'etat (general and fiscal since 1964), Journal
officiel (since 1955), responsa to the ministries of economy and
budget (since 1970) and all bilateral tax treaties (since 1970).
Updating response is reported to be 3 weeks (Gibert 1983b:154).
Also in France LEXIS bases its services on documents of authentic
texts - and emphasize that it offers small and capital letters,
underlining as from the editor and the correct French accents - "pour
LEXIS, un enfant 'legitime' n'est pas un enfant 'legitime'". The
grammatic generator has been extended to French, handling both plurals
and masculinum-feminimum - for "beau-pere" it also retrievs documents
containing "belle-mere". This is, however, no thesaurus function.
The retrieval is channeled into telecommunication facilities to the
Mead Data Central main facilities in Dayton, Ohio. The efficient
telecommunication link ensures that this does not create
inconveniences for the user in delayed response time.
Tariff structure is somewhat complex, being composed of a monthly
fee, a fee for the installation of the terminal and a degressive
tariff for connect time per hour starting at 650 and ending at 400 FF.
7.10.7 Specialized or regional information services
A number of more specialized services exist in France, and these
will be summarized below.
LEX is an internal service of the Secretariat
[Page 361 ]
general du gouvernement Francais, aiming at making available
legislation of the secretariat. The data base is reported to include
of approximately 200.000 documents of statutes in force (with an
annual increase of approxiamtely 10.000 documents), as they have been
published in the Journal officiel, using the MISTRAL text
retrieval system and Cii Honeywell Bull hardware. It does not directly
make the data base available, but it is reported (Stoliaroff 1983:2,
Gibert 1983b:152) that it is currently available with other French
data banks by the company Telesystemes, which also supports the
simplified user interface to MISTRAL known as QUESTEL.
Fichier legislatif informatise du
Secretariat general du gouvernement
francais
Hotel Matignon Service Informatique
13, rue Vaneau
F-75700 PARIS - France
JURINPI is a service of the Institut national de la
propiriete industrielle (which was created by the Ministre du
l'industrie et de la recherche in 1971), and specialize in industrial
property law. The origin of the system is a cooperation with IRETIJ at
Montpellier starting in November 1972, which in September 1974
resulted in a first data base (Barbet 1978:14), known by the
abbreviation BDDPI (Banque de donnees du droit de la propriete
industrielle). It uses a special retrieval program, presumably based
on or identical to the IRETIJ retrieval system JURIDOC (and IBM
hardware. Some 15.000 documents are available. These are cases in the
area of patents (brevets d'inventions) from 1823 and trademarks from
1904), including nonpublished cases from 1964. Also included are cases
from the Commission and the Court of the European Communities, and the
appeal chamber of the European Patent Office. Literature on patents
and trade marks is included from 1968. The service is not available
(1983) online, but there is an annual subscription for an answering
service (Barbet 1982:39).
Documentation juridique de
l'Institut de la propriete industrielle
26 bis, rue de Leningrad
F-75800 PARIS CEDEX 08 - France
[Page 362 ]
SIGAD is an acronym for Systeme interactif de gestion
automatisee de documentation, operated by ACODOPA (Association pour la
constitution d'une documentation patronale) for making a data base on
social law available to private companies. Some 100.000 documents are
included, comprising selected case law since 1911 and commentaries by
professional organizations and public administration on social law.
SIGAD uses the program BASIS on Control Data hardware, and may be
accessed by dial-up terminal or through the French packet-switched
network TRANSPAC.
34, Avenue Charles de Gaulle
F-92200 NEUILLY SUR SEINE - France
RESAGRI, which is a very welcome acronym for Resau des
organismes agricoles pour une documentation technique, socio-
economique, juridique et financiere, which is operated by the
Ministere de l'agriculture.
The system seems to have grown out of an effort made by the legal
department of the Casse national de credit agricole in 1971, which in
1974 resulted in an online retrieval system created by the department
and run on an IBM computer (Barbet 1978:15-17).
The legal documents are only part of this service offered within
the area of agriculture. There are some 40.000 legal documents
available, legislation in the field of land, banking, insurance and
social law; selected case law and literature (only references) from
major journals within the same areas. The system is using the
retrieval program MISTRAL (run on CII Honeywell Bull hardware), and is
available through dial-up terminals or the French packet-switched
network TRANSPAC.
Ministere de l'agriculture
78, rue de Varenne
F-75007 PARIS - France
CDJO, an abbreviation for Centre de documentation juridique
de l'ouest, was established in 1972 by a university center directed by
professor Cosnard under the law faculty at Rennes, and sponsored by
the Centre national de la recherche scientifique. Its
[Page 363 ]
objective is to make available regional case law, and the data
base comprises some 40.000 documents representing the published and
unpublished decisions of Cour de Rennes and Cour d'Angers since 1972.
The system is using the retrieval program MISTRAL (run on CII
Honeywell Bull hardware). It is not avaiable by terminal, but through
an answering service, to which also an annual subscription may be
made.
| Adress: | | Centre de documentation juridique de |
l'ouest
39, rue Jean Mace
F-35000 RENNES - France
ARIANE, an acronym for "Arrangement reticule des
informations pour l'approche des notions par leur environnement", is
oriented toward documents relevant for construction, and includes also
statutes and regulatory law. It is provided by the Institut technique
du batiment et des travaux publics in cooperation with CATED (Centre
d'assistance technique et de documentation). The legal part of the
data base is quite modest (some 400 documents), but these are updated
within a few days after being received by CATED. The system documents
the authentic text of the sources, using an inhouse system known as
ARIANE. There are 50 subscribers each using the service at an average
rate of 10 hours monthly.
| Adress: | | Institut technique du batiment et des |
travaux publics
9, Rue la Perouse
F-75116 PARIS - France
ISIS is a system documenting French and international
commercial, social, administrative and civil law operated by Chambre
de commerce et d'industrie de Paris (which also operates a videotex
system, see below). The system includes approximately 85.000 documents
with an annual increase of 25.000 represented in abstracts and
indexing terms. The system is available through C-CAM (see above under
sect .3 for address) using the BRS text retrieval system.
| Adress: | | Chambre de commerce et d'industrie de |
Paris
27, Avenue de Friedland
F-75382 PARIS CEDEX 08 - France
[Page 364 ]
Le particulier is a service for commentaries in labour law,
offering a data base of approximately 15 million characters (Gibert
1983b:149) and using a STAIRS system adapted for videotex - as it also
offers a data base especially developed for this access mode.
21, Boulevard Montmartre
F-75082 PARIS CEDEX 02 - France
NORIANE is an acronym for Normes et regelementations
techniques en ligne, and covers any technical requirements in French
or Community law, or in ISO standards. Altogether 33.000 references of
indexing terms are available and is updated every second month. The
service is avaiable through Telesystemes QUESTEL using MISTRAL
retrieval software.
| Adress: | | Association Francaise de Normalisation |
Tour Europe
F-92080 PARIS LA DEFENSE CEDEX - France
A curious computerized information system is Droit antiques, which
covers legal instruments from the ancient Mediterranean civilizations
- altogether some 11.000 documents with an annual growth of
approximately 1.500 documents. The retrieval system is SPLEEN 3
supplemented by MISTRAL.
| Adress: | | Centre de documentation des droits antiques |
12, Place du Pantheon
F-75005 PARIS - France
A few legal information systems are available through the French
teletex system Teletel. The publishers Berger-Levrault and Prat-
Europa have established a legal guide; and Le Particulier supplies a
form a legal encyclopedia on tax, social and general law, including an
interactive program for calculation of tax which has had some success.
The Institut national de la consommation offers weekly headlines on
consumer affairs, including a legal part.
The Chambre de commerce et d'industrie de Paris associated with
those in Lyon and Bordaux has
[Page 365 ]
established a data base known as DOC PRACTIC reproducing the
different leaflets and guides supplied by the Chambre, and including
brief summaries of business law. These are quite well indexed for a
teletex service.
| Adress: | | Service Juridique |
16, Rue Chateaubriand
F-75008 PARIS - France
The journal Juridigest (published by Documentation
Organique) gives summaries of journals; tax, social and general law
for the practising lawyer.
| Adress: | | Documentation Organique |
11, Rue de Teheran
F-75008 PARIS - France
[Page 366 ]
7.11 Germany
7.11.1 Introduction
One might have thought that the computer offered a tempting
technology to the well-organized minds of German lawyers. However, no
real development seems to have emerged until the late 1960ies - to
some extent touched off by the World Peace Through Law conference in
Geneva (cfr above at sect 6.4.1), cfr Fiedler 1968 with references.
But when the interest caught on, it blossomed into enthusiasm,
initiative, projects and studies in the first half of the 1970ies.
The Federal Republic of Germany has a federal constitutional
structure with a corresponding complexity of the legal system. It
would seem that the information crisis - which was emphasized in the
early days of the US development as well - was felt even more strongly
in Germany. This may have several reasons, one of the more probable
being the active part played by federal and state public
administrations. Also, arguments derived from the rule of law
("Rechtssicherheit") have considerable weight in Germany, where in the
post-war period, it has been considered important to strengthen the
ideal of the rule of law to make the legal system more resistant to
abuse.
In early papers the information crisis in law was pointed out
(Simitis 1967, Fiedler 1968:273-274), and it was brought home by the
monograph of professor Sprios Simitis of 1970: Informationskrise
des Rechts und Datenverarbeitung. And at the same time, the first
projects concerned with computerized legal information systems were
created, see the status report to the 48. Deutschen Juristentag
(Deutscher Juristentag 1970). At this conference, a commission
established by the previous Juristentag in 1969 reported, and the
standing deputation recommended (JURIS 1978:5):
[Page 367 ]
"Die staendige Deputation haelt es fuer dringend geboten,
ueber das Stadium der theoretischen Vorueberlegungen eines Einsatzes
datenverarbeitender Maschinen auch fuer die Rechtspraxis hinaus sich
nunmehr um die praktische Verwirklichung, mindestens durch die
Schaffung von Datenbanken, zu bemuehen, wie dies im Ausland schon
weithin geschieht."
One of the first efforts was the project sponsored by the private
firm Juradat GmbH & Co KG, which was announced at a press conference
in March 1970 in Berlin, see Haft 1970:169.
The data base was to be composed of case law, represented
by extracts: only selected passages of the authentic text was entered
into the system. The work on the system started late in 1969, and the
system was demonstrated in 1971, having then a data base of 30.000
documents, a planned annual expansion of 60.-80.000 documents (JURIS
1972:408).
Software was developed by Juradat for a UNIVAC computer,
and was said to have had an inventive design, featuring dialog
techniques, search strategies based on Boolean operators, thesaurus
and automatic synonym functions.
Juradata ceased its operations, however, March 1973 due
to financial difficulties.
There has also been a number of other relevant systems in Germany.
For instance Svoboda (1981) include the system on literature on
criminalistics, criminology and internal information at the
Bundeskriminalamtes in Wiesbaden; the system of the Sekretariats der
Kulturministerkonferenz at Aachen, documenting information on cases
etc dealing with universities, exams, university law etc; and the
system for documentation on data protection and security at the
Department of Computer Science at the University of Cologne.
Germany was characterized by two interesting activities in addition
to the actual systems being described below.
Firstly, an active interest in the development was
[Page 368 ]
taken by lawyers, both academics and practising lawyers. In
Germany, the implications of legal information retrieval systems were
discussed, and attempts were made to develop a policy in respect to
such services. This also led to a flurry of literature - more was
written on legal information systems in Germany in the first part of
the 1970ies than the sum of what was written elsewhere. Several
journals within the field emerged, none of them specialized in legal
information retrieval systems, though some of them reported regularly
on developments within the field.
Datenverarbeitung im Recht (DVR) is perhaps
currently the major general journal, its first issue was published in
1972. Also EDV und Recht is an important journal, having
published a number of special issues of great interest - its first
issue was published in 1970. Arbeitspapiere Rechtsinformatik
appears irregulary with - as the title implies - studies and research
reports. Its first issue was published in 1970.
All these three journals are published by the same
publisher:
| Adress: | | J
Schweitzer Verlag |
Geibelstrasse 8
D-8000 MUNICH 80 - Germany
Oeffentliche Verwaltung und Datenverarbeitung has
merged with another and more general journal, but does occasionally
contain papers of interest.
| Adress: | | Verlagsgesellschaft Rudolf Mueller GmbH |
Stolberger Strasse 84
D-5000 COLOGNE 41 - Germany
DSWR (Datenverarbeitung in Steuer, Wirtschaft und
Recht) is published in cooperation with the DATEV organization, and
should be mentioned in respect of the service offered by DATEV.
Wilhelmstrasse 9
D-8000 MUNICH 40 - Germany
This literary activity was parallelled by an academic activity.
[Page 369 ]
An important institution was the Institut fuer Datenverarbeitung im
Rechtswesen (IDR), which in 1971 was established as an independent
institute at the major research center Gesellschaft fuer Mathematik
und Datenverarbeitung (GMD) near Bonn directed by professor Herbert
Fiedler, one of the founders of computers and law as a discipline in
Germany.
| Adress: | | Institut fuer Datenverarbeitung im Rechtswesen (IDR)
|
Postfach 1240, Schloss Birlinghoven
D-5205 ST AUGUSTIN 1 - Germany
At this institute, a number of very interesting studies were
undertaken of legal information systems and text retrieval systems. A
major effort was the MAJUS project, initiated in 1974 and terminated
in 1977 (cfr above at sect 5.4.5.
In 1982, the GMD was reorganized, and through this reorganization,
the future of IDR was reconsidered. Currently it looks like the GMD
over the next five years will be attempting to find a solution through
which the IDR may be transplanted to an university environment.
Professor Fiedler also heads a smaller university institution known
as the Forschungsstelle fuer juristische Informatik (FJI) at the
faculty of law, Bonn University.
At the Regensburg University, professor Wilhelm Steinmueller
established his Arbeitsgruppe Rechtsinformatik, which for a time was
very active. Among other things, a documentation service was
established at Regensburg in 1973 - REDOK - which was later renamed
LEDOK (Lehrstuhldokumentationssysteme), and then integrated into the
international bibliography of computers and law of the IDG, Florence.
This service was actually proceeded by an early and major bibliography
on computers and law, JUDAC (cfr Schubert/Steinmueller 1971). In 1982
Steinmueller was given a chair in "legal informatics" at the faculty
of science in Bremen - the first chair in "Rechtsinformatik" in
Germany. This hopefully will guarantee his future involvement in the
field.
[Page 370 ]
| Adress: | | Computer Science Department |
University of Bremen
PO Box 2800
BREMEN - Germany
At Frankfurt, professor Spiros Simitis established a
Forschungstelle fuer juristische Dokumentation, which for some years
published the series Kybernetik - Datenverarbeitung - Recht
(first issue in 1971). Professor Simitis' chair is in labour law, and
he is also the Datenschutzbeauftragter for the land of Hessen.
Therefore one should not be surprised to see his research center for
computers and law being somewhat less active these days.
At the University of Hannover, professor Wolfgang Kilian
established in June 1983 an Institut fuer Rechtsinformatik (IRI). He
is mainly concerned with substantial questions relating to civil and
labour law. IRI (Hannover) has started a series of publications named
Wissenschaft und Praxis.
| Adress: | | Institut fuer Rechtsinformatik |
Fakultaet fuer Rechtswissenschaft
Technische Universitaet
HANNOVER - Germany
At the University of Tuebingen, professor Fridjof Haft - who was
quite active in the early 1970ies - seems to have taken a new
initiative cooperating with linguists at his university, moving in the
direction of natural language retrieval strategies and deontic
systems.
| Adress: | | Juristische Fakultaet |
Universitaet Tuebingen
Wilhelmstrasse 7
D-7400 TUEBINGEN - Germany
At the University of Augsburg, professor Dieter Suhr holds a chair
which is partly dedicated to computers and law.
Also at the University of Munich, there is a joint institute for
legal philosophy and computers and law, in which interesting
developments are taking place - not least in using computeraids for
the teaching of law.
[Page 371 ]
| Adress: | | Institut fuer Rechtsphilosophie und Rechtsinformatik
|
Universtaet Muenchen
Professor-Huber-Platz 2
D-8000 MUNICH - Germany
This survey does not do justice to the activities of German
researchers within the area of computers and law in general. In
Germany the area is more facetted than in most other countries, but
even so, it is easy to see that work on the legal problems of
computerized systems in public administration may be of great interest
for those oriented towards legal information retrieval systems. Though
incompleatly, we nevertheless think that the major centers have been
indicated.
Above, we have briefly discussed the major research project of
Siemens - CONDOR (Communication in Natuerlicher Sprache mit Dialog-
Orientierten Retrieval-Systemen), one of the major research efforts
in the area of text retrieval of which we are aware (cfr above at sect
5.3.1). This effort was, however, discontinued in 1981.
In addition there are some other projects of interest. We have
mentioned the activities of the Union for Conservation of Nature and
Natural Resources, Bonn, in respect of the ENLEX project of the
European Communities, which was proceeded by a less successful
national system, ELIS (cfr Technical Study II 1978:64). The Federal
Environment Agency maintains a system named JURDOK. The Umplis system
has a file (Ulidat) covering legal literature. At the University of
Aachen there is a Dokumentationsprojekt Deutsches Hochschulerecht. The
Federal Criminal Agency operates a legal information system known as
COD (including 8.000 documents of bibliographic references).
More important is, perhaps, the information system of the German
parliament (Bundestag), which has an impressive and very active
legislative information system known as PARLIS/GESTA.
The most interesting system of the parliament is GESTA, a
system giving a current status of the legislative process. The system
is published in a loose-leaf edition - but also a videotex service in
cooperation with the German Bildschirmtext. It
[Page 372 ]
is foreseen that some of the services currently offered
by GESTA in time will be offered also within the JURIS system.
7.11.2 JURIS
(1) Introduction
In 1967, the Bundesministerium der Justiz started planning a legal
information system. A working party was formed - Arbeitskreis fuer
juristische Dokumentation mit Hilfe der EDV - which included academic
lawyers, representatives of the industry and the Bundesministerium der
Justiz. This group published a report on its work as an annex to the
Bundesanzeiger 41 of 28 February 1970 (JURIS 1978:3).
At the Justizministerkonferenz 31 May 1969 a commission was
established, chaired by the Bundesministerium der Justiz. This group
has supervised the development of the JURIS project, which followed
shortly afterwards (JURIS 1978:3-4).
Also in 1969, the professors Klug, Fiedler and Simitis on contract
with the Bundesministerium der Justiz suggested how a computerized
legal information service could be established (JURIS 1978:4).
In October 1970, the Bundesministerium der Justiz established a
project group for looking into the possibilities of improving the
legal information system through computerized solutions. This group
published the results of its findings in January 1972 in the
comprehensive report Das Juristische Informationssystem - Analyse,
Planung, Vorschlaege (JURIS 1972).
A summary of the report is published in English as "The
legal information system - analysis, planning, proposals"; Council of
Europe EXP/Ord Jur (72)15. The project group was composed of
representatives for the ministry of justice, the GMD Bonn, and the
consulting company C-E-I-R GmbH Frankfurt.
The report sketched a grand design for its time - a comprehensive
legal information system accessible
[Page 373 ]
through 30.-40.000 terminals (JURIS 1972:256-258). The grand plan
evoked some reactions - perhaps most explicitly from an organization
of 29 legal publishers - Verlegervereinigung Rechtsinformatik, which
put forwards its view in a report titled Staatliche
Rechtsdokumentation - Gefahr fuer die juristische Fachliteratur
(1975). The grand design and the reaction to it are the joint
explanation for the critical studies and academic research taking
place in Germany in the first half of the 1970ies. It soon became
evident, however, that the thousands of terminals were not emerging
overnight - and the reduced investments following the more difficult
economics of the 1970ies soothed the concern of the providers of
conventional information services. Today, the critical interest is not
more predominant in Germany than elsewhere. But we may still be
grateful for the profusion of arguments brought forth in the swirl of
activity following the first JURIS report.
| Adress: | | Der
Bundesministerium der Justiz |
Referat ZA5a
Postfach 20 06 50
D-5300 BONN 2 - Germany
On the basis of this report, a "development system" was launched,
directed by dr Josef Fabry of the ministry of justice under the
acronym JURIS (Juristisches Informationssystem). This development
system was designed to acquire further information for the completion
system, and a number of choices were postponed until the experiments
of the development system were conducted.
Some confusion may arise from the fact that the acronym
selected by the Germans is identical to the one denoting the US
Justice Retrieval and Inquiery system. The German ministry of justice
did actually clear the matter with their US colleagues before adopting
the name. Also, it is an obvious acronym, shown by the fact that the
Norwegian Research Center for Computers and Law at one time used the
name JURIS (Juridiske informasjonssystemer) for its research program
in legal information systems. This was, however, renamed NORIS in
1972.
One of the major choices was, obviously, the selection of a
retrieval system. In the development
[Page 374 ]
system, several possible retrieval systems were tested. A small
test data base of constitutional law was established, designed to be
system independent. This was used for benchmark tests against
different retrieval system, and in this respect, a cooperation with
GMD was established. The text retrieval systems under consideration
were the Siemens system GOLEM, the IBM system STAIRS, and the
Telefunken system TELDOK (a company no longer existing). In addition,
a system developed by GMD known as TR/1 was tested.
The "Text retrieval system/1" (TR/1) deserves some
comments. It was developed 1972-75 by H.-Georg Kraemer at the GMD, and
had some features not commonly found in text retrieval systems at that
time. This included a modular data base structure, a floating document
unit for retrieval purposes (the user might specify the documentary
unit for his Boolean request), historical retrieval, right- and
left-hand truncation, and exploitation of the citation structures in
legislation. The system was tested only on the small data base of
constitutional law, but did seem extremely promising. It was not,
however, developed further.
The trial period ended in the launching of the second stage of the
JURIS development plan: establishment of a fully operational, but
limited system - which should be further tested.
In this early period, also a lot of interesting
auxilliary research was carried out. The user research of
Jungjohann/Soergel/Seidel/Uhlig (1974) is still one of the major
efforts known. Also, the economic analyses of Gluek (1976) is perhaps
the only published example of a detailed discussion of the costs and
possible savings of the proposed system. As always, the Germans
entrusted nothing to chance, but based their policy on solid research.
In a talk to the Verlegerverein Rechtsinformatik in Munich 22 May
1973, the minister of justice introduced the ideal of JURIS under the
slogan "Auf dem Weg zur buergernahen Rechtsordnung". And by a decision
of the Bundeskabinett 12 September the same year, he was authorized to
launch the pilot JURIS system for a development phase of 6 years.
[Page 375 ]
(2) JURIS pilot system
The pilot system - or the development stage - of JURIS started in
1973, and ended in 1982. Only one year after its initiation, the
government embarked upon a more general "Programm zur Foerderung der
Information und Dokumentation", known as the "IuD Programm", by a
cabinet decision of 17 December 1974. One of the
"Fachinformationssysteme" under this program is "FIS 11 (Recht)", and
the JURIS project was accomodated within the framework of the overall
project (JURIS 1978:17-18).
The first cross-roads were passed when the Bundesministerium der
Justiz assisted by GMD at the end of 1974 selected the Siemens system
GOLEM II as the basis for further development (after considering
offers from IBM and Siemens). GOLEM is, of course, a German text
retrieval program - and considerations of industrial policy may have
been taken into account when choosing GOLEM rather than its only
realistic competitor, the IBM system STAIRS (which was actually
developed by IBM, Germany).
GOLEM is a straigthforward text retrieval system, based on a
Boolean search language. In its original implementation, the user
interface was admittedly somewhat clumsy - for instance not permitting
the users to use the Boolean operators at the same time as specifying
the search terms. Since then, however, the interface has been greatly
modified by the JURIS organization, for instance Boolean operators may
now be specified in the search request with the search terms. JURIS
maintains to have considerable influence on the development of GOLEM.
A completely new release of the system is expected for 1984-85.
The current version, GOLEM BS2000, has a KWIC format with
highlighting, and permits the user to store search requests as
macroes. The program also permits, in the legislative data bank, to
retrieve documents in force at a certain specified date - a very
useful function.
A terminal known as TRANSDATA 8160 is recommended for the
JURIS system, and permits the use of 17 function keys, cfr
Stewen/Busse 1983:9.
[Page 376 ]
A JURIS computer center was established within the
Bundesministerium der Justiz, Bonn in 1975, and a second mainframe was
acquired in 1980, both being Siemens 7.541 computers (Stewen/Busse
1983:10).
The system was initially launched within two areas, social law and
tax law, and in close cooperation with the traditional documentation
centers of federal high courts. This is seen as a guarantee for
quality and objectivity of the data bases (cfr Stewen/Busse 1983:5).
Since 1954, the Bundessozialgericht has maintained a manual
information system covering all types of legal sources. By 1970, this
had grown to include 450.000 file cards (Brackmann et al 1974:9), and
the high activity of legislators and courts within this area of law,
made the system a victim of the information crisis. The
Bundessozialgericht established a project group to see whether a
computerized solution might be found.
This group designed the basis of a retrieval system
(Brackmann et al 1972), which to a large extent was a computerized
version of the existing manual system.
Five different document types were established,
corresponding to statutes, statutory instruments, regulations,
literature and case law (Brackmann et al 1974:15). Each of these types
had a number of fixed fields in addition to an abstract. The abstract
is composed with no other restraints than some coordination norms.
A test data base of 1.200 documents on family allowance
was created for a spectrum of legal sources, cfr Brackmann et al
1974:37-38 for examples. In this test data base, 41 per cent of the
terms occurred in the abstract, and 59 per cent in the fixed field (as
"aspektgebundene Deskriptoren"). The test data base used the GOLEM I
retrieval system.
The experiment was brought to an end in 1973, and the plans for a
more comprehensive Sozialrechtsdatenbank became integrated in the
general JURIS project. The court does actually interpret the
documentation area
[Page 377 ]
of social law quite generously, and of the case law selected (ca
50 per cent of the case law data bank, cfr
Bonk/Busse/Kaefer/Neus/Stewen/Thiele 1983:7-8), only approximately 30
per cent of the decisions originates from the social courts.
The second area selected, was that of tax law, in cooperation with
the Bundesfinanzministerium and Bundesfinanzhof. In 1979, the
Bundesfinanzhof established a a word processing system (a NIXDORF data
collection system) which interfaces with JURIS, not only reducing
updating response, but also maintenance costs. Such a scheme has been
introduced for the Bundessozialgericht as well as the
Bundesarbeitsgericht and the Bundesgerichtshof. Such or similar
systems are under consideration also for the other federal high
courts, and high courts of the Laender.
Subsequently, the Federal Labour Cort joined the project, and from
1980 the Federal Supreme Court and the Federal Administrative Court
started to establish documentation within their areas of jurisdiction
as part of JURIS. For local courts, regional courts, and higher
regional courts, experts work on contract with JURIS to extend its
data base. For the administrative courts of the Laender, the
Oberverwaltungsgericht of Nordrhein-Westfalen in Muenster have been
cooperating with JURIS since 1979. Likewise, experts contracted by
JURIS supplements the data base by documents on legal literature not
covered by the documentation centers of the courts, Busse 1982:25.
Currently (December 1983) the data base includes some 350.000
documents organized in four pools, the case law file (Pool r) (187.500
decisions), the literature file (Pool 1) (170.000 documents), the
administrative provisions file (Pool v) (21.500 documents) and the
statutory file (Pool ntest) (54.500 documents). In addition, there is
a "hot-file" (Aktualitetaeten-Datenbank) of some 5.500 court decisions
and 7.800 bibliographical documents.
A rather comprehensive review of the system as it stands
1983 is given by Bonk/Busse/Kaefer/Neus/Stewen/Thiele 1983.
The case law file contains a selection of post war court decisions
on social law (including labour law); a selection of decisions on tax
law (since 1945);
[Page 378 ]
decisions on civil damages (since 1965); all published cases of
the Supreme Court (since 1951). All published cases in 120 major
reporters have been included since 1977, supplemented by unpublished
cases provided by the courts themselves. For the decisions of the
Bundesfinanzhof, the authentic text is stored (since 1981 also the
unpublished cases). For other decisions only abstracts are stored.
The literature file contain references to all post-war literature
on social law, while for literature on tax law and private law,
approximately 150 major journals are analysed since 1977. The
documents contain only abstracts of the cited literature.
The statutory file contains approximately 54.500 of the 90.000
sections making up the Federal Statutes, relating to the
administration of justice, labor law, social insurance and war victim
compensation. The problems of editing the statutory material are
emphasized. The statutory material is stored in authentic form.
The administrative provisions file contains approximately 21.500
documents corresponding to 12.000 provisions on tax law, and 9.500
provisions on social law. Of these, approximately one third is in
abstract form, the rest is stored in authentic form.
Before storage, each document is intellectually indexed for formal
data like authour, court, bibliographical references, and some
indexing terms are added, including statutory citations. There are 36
fixed fields for court decisions, 68 for legal literature, and 42 for
statutory and regulatory material (Busse 1982:25).
It may be of interest to note that a norm for
abbreviations of citations etc has been developed and promoted by the
JURIS project (DIN-Norm 31620 - JURIS 1978:37-38), on which some
23.000 titles of provisions have been developed so far. Also other
indexes are developed to assist retrieval by JURIS, like synonym
thesaurus (Beziehungslisten), systematic classification
(Sachgebietsgliederung), and problem classification
(Problemenkreisgliederung - PKG).
Secondly, the documents are processed by at least two
[Page 379 ]
programs before being added to the data base.
PARAT is a program developed by JURIS for control and editing of
the documents, with facilities of handling cross-references to other
legal sources. It has mainly three functions (cfr
Bonk/Busse/Kaefer/Neus/Stewen/Thiele 1983:19):
(1) Control of the documentary superstructure - that this
is complete, formally correct supplemented by validity checks on the
different fields.
For instance considering the structure of the data,
ensuring that institutions and states correspond to the names in a
predefined list, that numerical data are numerical, that dates are
between 1800 and the current year, and that the total length does not
exceed a certain limit.
(2) automatic completion of some field derived from other
fields.
For instance the name of the author is included both as
"author" and "person" in the documentary superstructure, and the
automatic identification of values for fields like "Gerichtstyp",
Gerichtsort" and "Sprachkoerper" is based on the text of the document
itself; and
(3) splitting of some descriptors into meaningful
sub-descriptors. For instance (JURIS 1978:31-33)
25 June 1977
would be split into
1977,
June 1977, and
25 June 1977
PASSAT is a Siemens program which preprocesses the text producing a
sort of synonym thesaurus (Vergleichwortliste, or simply VWL) cfr
Bonk/Busse/Kaefer/Neus/Stewen/Thiele 1983:21-24. Each word is here
reduced to a basic form, not necessarily the grammatical basic form,
but the part of the word which is unaltered by all inflexions.
[Page 380 ]
PASSAT takes care of what is called "Mehrwortbegriff", that is a
phrase with a special legal implication like "Treu und Glauben" or
"qualifizierte Mitbestimmung", by making their use as single search
terms possible.
Each word is reduced to a "Stammwort" - a basic form (infinitum for
verbs, singular for substantives etc), in order to reduce the problems
for users created by the inflexions and other word forms gererated by
German grammar. The reduction is done by having the program consult a
list currently consisting of approximately 240.000 words - and as
Busse (1982:25) remarks, the elaboration necessary to establish the
list "alone costs years of work".
For instance "Hund" is associated with the suffixes "s",
"e", "es", and "en" as well as the original basic form.
In the VWL, each basic form has four codes. The first is a double
code, determining whether the word is a stop word or not, and in which
way the basic form is to be represented in the search file (as only
the basic form, or as several synonyms). The second code specifies the
type of word (adjective, pronoun, etc) including whether the pluaral
form is formed through vowel mutation. In the third code, the suffix
list is specified - some 120 different combinations have been
identified. The fourth code specifies how the word combines with other
basic forms to create a compound word.
In the inverted file, compounded words are split, and each of the
elements are indexed in the inverted file in addition to the original
compound word. For instance "Ratenvertragsunterzeichnungen" is split
into "Rate" + "Vertrag" + "s" + "Unterzeichnung" + "en". All parts of
the word (excluding the joint letters) and their combinations form
entries in the search file.
This redundancy actually brings the overhead up to a very high
figure (it has been mentioned that this is as high as 8, compared to
the approximately 1.8 in most conventional systems).
JURIS (1978:33-34) reports that the Bundersministerium
der Justiz have developed an alternative
[Page 381 ]
program known as PEGASUS, which could replace PASSAT and
require less computer resources. At that time it was not yet in
operation as the necessary "Wortformen-Deskriptor-Lexikon" had not
been fully developed. Actually the system never became fully
operational, and there are no current plans to make it replace the
improved PAS-SAT.
The actual updating of the data base is then carried out by the
Siemens program GOGO.
Users are connected to the system mainly by leased lines, but
dial-up facilities were introduced in 1982. The system is designed
to interface with the Bundespost packet switched network DATEX-P, and
the German videotex system Bildschirmtext. No videotex experiments
have taken place, but the Diebold report (see below) estimates that as
much as 80-90 per cent of future use will originate from videotex
terminals.
In 1983, according to the plans for the pilot project, some 50
users were connected to JURIS by leased lines, an additional 15 by
dial-up terminals. Currently the system is used some 1.400 hours
monthly. In 1980, 24.000 search requests were processed, and in 1982,
this figure was up to 20.000 for the first six months - indicating a
growth of almost 100 per cent in only one year (cfr Busse 1982:27).
There are currently (December 1983) pending more than 500 requests
to be connected to the system, which, however, will fall outside the
scope of the pilot project.
(3) Extended JURIS system
The development contract for the pilot project JURIS system was
completed in 1982. The pilot system was designed mainly to satisfy the
requirements of the cooperating federal courts and the
Bundesministerium der Justiz. An extended service would also have to
satisfy the requirements of the states (Laender) and municipalities,
as well as the legal profession at large.
[Page 382 ]
To assess the system, the independent consultant organization
Diebold Deutschland GmbH was contracted.
The report itself is another example of German
professionalism - a cost-benefit analysis of considerable detail,
which take into consideration not only ecomics, but also discusses
factors like availability, objectivity, rule of law
("Rechtssicherheit"), and innovation.
As to costs the report concludes (Diebold 1981:322) that JURIS
should be able to cover its cost in the medium range perspective:
"Ab 1988 koennen die kumulierten Gesamtkosten ohne
Investitionen fuer das Entwicklungssystem, ab 1990 die kumulierten
Gesamtkosten mit Investitionen gedeckt werden. Ab 1986 steht den
laufenden Kosten ein gleicher, bzw. hoeerer Ertragsanteil gegenueber."
This has suggested that JURIS should be opened to institutional
participation by suitable partners, establishing a company under
private law. As probable participants (Stewen/Busse 1983:10-11) are
mentioned the federal and state governments, the professional
organizations (particulary the German Law Society and the Federal Bar
Council), DATEV (see below) and publishers of legal literature.
In our opinion it is interesting to note that one does see the
possible transit from a government to a private system (though the
private organization will certainly be of a very special nature). This
may be taken as a confirmation of the difficulties in trying to run a
legal information service of a general and open nature within the
framework of a traditional government agency. The routines for
budgeting and decisionmaking may, perhaps, be less than appropriate
for a service actually offered on the commercial market - and
parallels to the German solution are found elsewhere.
The Rechnungshof (the federal audit organization) questioned in the
summer of 1983 the justification of JURIS in spite of the Diebold
report. For a brief period this created some uneasiness as to the
future of the system. Though the federal government still has not
settled the political issue, there is
[Page 383 ]
nevertheless (at the end of 1983) a general concensus among the
relevant agencies (including the Ministry of Finance) that JURIS
should be continued.
7.11.3 DATEV
A private initiative was taken by the institution Documenta Steuer
und Recht (founded by Deutsche Wissenschaftlichen Steuerinstitut der
Steuerbevollmaechtigten, three legal publishers, and DATEV
(Datenverarbeitungsorganisation des steuerberatenden Berufes in der
Bundesrepublik Deutschland, eingetragener Genossenschaft), cfr Sebiger
1971:70. DATEV was actually founded in 1966 as a nonprofit
organization to support its members in their professional functions,
particulary bookkeeping, by utlizing computer systems. Currently
(Farrenkopf 1983:2) DATEV has more than 22.000 members.
Baumgartnerstrasse 6-14
D-8500 NUEREMBERG 80 - Germany
In 1969, an agreement was reached with the Finanzverwaltung des
Bundes, some states and IBM Germany for an experimental system in tax
law. The aim of this effort was to develop standards for a
documentation system within the tax administration; 52 per cent of the
persons asked expressed an interest in computerized services, cfr
Sebiger 1971:70.
The project selected a data base of decisions by the
Bundesfinanzhof (1.073 decisions from 1951-1969) on corporation tax
law, and a set of related regulations. The decisions were structured
in 14 fields, and the authentic text was included. In the experiment,
the retrieval was conducted by the IBM system DPS.
The ambitions of the Steurrechtsbank escalated to a general tax law
information service comprising legislation, case law and literature.
Data entry was facilitated by optical character readers, and a stop
word list of 256 words developed (making up some 39 per cent of the
total number of words in the texts) cfr Simitis 1974:12. The retireval
system was changed
[Page 384 ]
from DPS to the IBM text retrieval system STAIRS.
In the period of 1972-75, DATEV operated its services using the IBM
computers of the Bavarian State Finance Ministry (Farrenkopf
1983:2-3).
The system became operational in March 1975, and did at that time
include some 20.000 documents (published decisions of Bundesfinanzhof
since 1950, responsa from the fiscal administration, papers, comments
on important regulations from legal journals since 1972, cfr DSWR
Sonderheft 1975:6. From the beginning, as much as 120 terminals were
connected to the system. In September of the same year, the first user
research was conducted to develop guidelines for the further
development of the system.
As indicated, DATEV furnishes several services to its members - the
legal information service is known as LEXinform provided by its
Abteilung Rechtsdokumentation.
Currently, the data base is structured in 4 files (Farrenkopf
1983:3, 5). The data base contains currently (1983) some 60.000
documents with an estimated annual increase of 7.000 documents. The
data base is available also on microform for off-line study of
documents.
The first file contains all published decisions by the
Bundesfinanzhof with the tax law cases of other federal superior
courts (since 1950; selected decisions by the former supreme court of
finance for the period 1918-45; selected decisions of the European
Community court relating to Germany.
The second file contains decisions from the German finance courts
(since 1972).
The third file contains all tax decrees and instructions in force
issued by the federal and state finance ministries, and the superior
finance directorates.
The fourth file contains papers, comments and expert opinions
selected from 30 major journals.
In addition there are documents on the tax advisory professional
law, and a test data bases in trial costs and family law. Also, in
1980 development of a
[Page 385 ]
data base for commercial and company law was started.
Documents are prepared through an initial "expert's examination
phase" where the documentary superstructure is established - in
principle quite similar to what is done in respect of the JURIS data
base. With the exception of the literature file (which contains only
abstracts), all documents contain the authentic text of the source.
Documents are then controlled by a DATEV system known as DADOCS.
The files for the retrieval system are established by programs
developed by DATEV on the basis of STAIRS.
DADOCS is also the name given to the DATEV retrieval system, which
is a further development of STAIRS. All commands and messages are in
German, and the STAIRS dialog has been simplified, and function keys
can be used for several commands (cfr Farrenkopf 1983:5). Svoboda
(1981:181- 182) mentioned three strategies of DATEV to make STAIRS
more user friendly: reduction of original commands, combination of
commands to macro commands and altering character commands to
numerical commands.
DATEV does not require special terminals, but sets out some
standards which terminals have to meet before being used for their
services. For the future, ranking functions will be developed
(Farrenkopf 1983:9).
DATEV maintains its own communication network which includes 21
multiplexers and concentrators.
For the use of LEXinform, a fee of 60 DM monthly is charged,
covering up to 40 minutes of connect time. Further connect time is
charged with 1.50 DM per minute (Farrenkopf 1983:7).
LEXinform is oriented towards the end user, but has made available
an "Exec-service" through which questions will be formulated into
search requests by DATEV specialists and stored into the system for
subsequent access by the user. A current awareness service is also
offered by LEXinform - each forthnight a selection of texts are
included in a review.
It is announced that LEXinform will interface with
[Page 386 ]
the German videotex service Bildschirmtext, and a pilot-phase of
this project has already been realized (Farrenkopf 1983:8).
As mentioned above, DATEV also publishes the journal
DSWR.
[Page 387 ]
7.12 Greece
In Greece, the activity in respect of computers and law has been
centered around the University of Thessaloniki. At the Seminar of
private international law and comparative law there has been
established a Research group on legal data processing, directed by
professor D J Evrigenis.
The group hosted the Sixth Symposium on Legal Data
Processing in Europe, which was organized by the Council of Europe in
1981 at Thessaloniki.
This group has launched a project known as INNOMOS, a name formed
by the prefix "in" denoting "informatics" and "nomos" meaning "law" in
Greek (Passias 1978:19 n 1).
| Adress: | | University of Thessaloniki |
Seminar of private international law and comparative law
Research group on legal data processing
THESSALONIKI - Greece
Due to its background in an institution concerned with private
international law, its data base will be case law within this area.
The documents are identical to those published in case reporters,
which are abbreviated forms of the authentic decisions, Passias
1981:8.
Subsequent to computerizing the reports, INNOMOS carries out three
operations
- correction of typographical errors
- standardization of dates, abbreviations and certain non-standard
symbols
- additon of indexing terms, comments etc
So far the project has, however, concentrated on some of the
problems which the Greek language poses to text retrieval (see for
instance Passias 1978, 1981).
The Greek alphabet is, of course, different from the
[Page 388 ]
Roman - only 14 of the 24 letters are equivalent to Roman, and
the system includes also diacritic signs to distinguish phonetically
and graphically between words.
Greek includes two different language systems - "Demotic" and
"Katharevousa" - coexisting in the same language area, having a common
vocabulary but following different grammatical and syntactical rules,
and also being mixed. Within each language, the possible number of
word forms is remarkable high - verbs commonly having more than 50
forms.
It is expected that the research group will have made available
funds for purchasing a dedicated computer system, and that a standard
text retrieval system will be purchased. Up till now, the experiments
of the group have been carried out using the general facilities of the
University and ad hoc programs.
[Page 389 ]
7.13 Holland
7.13.1 Introduction
It might be thought that Holland, a country renowned for its
international and inventive publishers, would have pioneered legal
information retrieval systems - as it has indeed in some areas of
technical information. This is not so, however, and the situation is
rather unsettled.
Quite early in the 1970ies, a foundation calling itself Stichting
Juridische Informatica was established based in Utrecht, with a young
academic lawyer, Frits de Graaf as the principal source of initiative.
For a time the group centered around the SJI played a considerable
role in trying to start some development in Holland, but in the later
years no news have come form the group.
There is, however, at Erasmus Universiteit in Rotterdam a Workshop
for Computer Science and Law, directed by professor Richard V de
Mulder. This group is mainly concerned with deontic systems, but plays
an important role in respect to teaching of computers and law.
| Adress: | | Workshop for Computer Science and Law Erasmus University
|
Postbus 1738
NL-3000 DR ROTTERDAM - Holland
Also at the Free University of Amsterdam there has recently been
created a chair in computers and law, which is taken by professor Guy
PV Vandenberghe. A Computer/Law institute has been created responsible
for teaching and research in the field. Professor Vendenberghe is
assisted by Anja Oskamp, a former research fellow of the Norwegian
Reseach Center for Computers and Law. The Computer/Law institute is
associated with the Dutch editoral board of the new Kluwer journal in
computers and law, Computerrecht (see under the national entry
for Belgium for further information).
[Page 390 ]
| Adress: | | Faculteit der Rechtsgeleerdheid |
Computer/Law Institute
Free University of Amsterdam
Postbox 7161
NL-1007 MC AMSTERDAM - Holland
At the University of Groningen, a course in computers and law is
taught through the cooperation of several lecturers.
| Adress: | | University of Groningen |
Faculty of Law
Turftorenstraat 13
NL-9712 BM GRONINGEN - Holland
Completing the notes on computers and law in Dutch universities,
one might mention professor H Franken of the University of Leiden, who
has used computerized methods in his own research.
| Adress: | | Faculteit der Rechtsgeleerdheid |
Rijksuniversiteit te Leiden
Postbus 9520
NL-2300 RA LEIDEN - Holland
There has been an initiative by the Ministry of Justice (1979) of
creating a cooperative institution for providing a national legal
information system. This presumed the participation of the 5 major
legal publishers of Holland - Samson, Kluwer, Vermande, Vugia and
North-Holland. This initative was, at least in the form presented,
rejected by the publishers (Hainebach 1982:14).
In spite of this, there has been two interesting developments, one
centered around the legal publisher Kluwer, the other around the
parliament.
7.13.2 Kluwer JURID
Kluwer is a group of publishing houses, including the Kluwer Groep
rechtswetenschappen based in Deventer, which is the major legal
publisher of Holland. It publishes statutory material, case law and
legal literature.
[Page 391 ]
| Adress: | | Kluwer Groep rechtswetenschappen bv |
Postbus 23
DEVENTER - Holland
In 1975, a project was initiated to create a computerized legal
information service based on the publications of Kluwer. The system
was implemented on the Honeywell Bull system of Kluwer of Ijselbrein,
using the British text retrieval system STATUS, which was modified by
Kluwer itself. The modifications is reported to amount to three
man-years (Technical Study II 1978:68) and as much as 30 per cent is
reported to be Dutch coding (Verschoor 1981:165).
In 1979, a pilot system with 15 users were launched. The users were
picked to present a variety, and the tests of the pilot system aimed
at gaining experience with the user needs. The test had quite a
limited data base - case law from Nederlandse Jurisprudentie since
1973 and a selection of abstracts of legal literature - altogether
approximately 10 million characters. For data entry, also a Kurtzweil
Data Entry Machine (KDEM) was used for optical reading (Verschoor
1981:166). The test period lasted until 1981 and was actually extended
to as much as 50 users, and 350 lawyers were trained during the
period.
The test data base was called Kluwer's "Juridische
Databank" (Verschoor 1981:163), but the system would seem later to
have been renamed JURID.
During 1981 a commercial service was launced. In 1982, the data
base had a volume of approximately 400 million characters with an
annual growth of 120 million characters, and contained the following
files (Hainebach 1982:16):
Case law, civil and criminal cases (since 1965)
Case law on expropriation (since 1972)
Case of the week (since 1976)
Cases of administrative law (since 1977)
Immediate suits at law (since 1981)
Fiscal cases (since 1975)
Data juridica, a bibliographical reference service (since
1972)
Guide for legal practice (since 1971)
Ship and damage (since 1972)
[Page 392 ]
Index to published statutory compilations and reference
books
Fiscal literature
Intellectual property law (since 1973)
In 1982 JURID had approximately 130 subscribers. In addition to an
annual subscription fee of 500 Hfl, the user pays a modest 1 Hfl per
"search units". Hainebach (1982:16) reports than an average session of
15-20 minutes contains approximately 35 search units, making the
hourly rate a corresponding 105-140 Hfl.
7.13.3 The PARAC - Vermande project
In 1976, a parliamentary documentation center was established under
the acronym PARAC (Parlementair automatisering centrum) for both
houses of the parliament. A data base covering three documentation
areas were to be established, one on the questions and debates in both
houses, one on press documentation and the last on legislation.
PARAC has based its system on the IBM text retrieval program
STAIRS, and it is maintained that the system to a large extent is
modelled on the system in the Italian Camera dei deputati.
The establishment of the data base on legislation was contracted to
a private legal publisher, Koninkijke Vermande, in 1980. The authentic
text of the legislation was to be converted under the supervision by
PARAC - a text of some 200 million characters.
It is somewhat unclear under what contractual terms the project
operated. Hainebach (1982:16) states:
"As access to PARAC was limited, Vermande decided to
produce a separate Dutch legislation data base called NLEX ..."
NLEX is actually a data base operated by the Belgian legal
information service CREDOC, maintained on the computer system of
Belendis, the service bureaux also used by CREDOC and which is a
EURONET host.
Initially, the PARAC legislation data base and NLEX was identical,
but Vermande has enhanced the coverage
[Page 393 ]
beyond the limits of the initial contract. It is expected that by
the end of 1984 NLEX will contain all Dutch legislation in force, a
total of approximately 400 million characters. The legislation is in
authentic form.
The situation is somewhat unsettled. The initiative of the Ministry
of Justice is still valid as some sort of reaction to an
unsatisfactory structure for a national legal information system, and
the future will probably see developments.
[Page 394 ]
7.14 Ireland
The republic of Ireland has not been very active in respect of
legal information retrieval systems. However, it is reported that its
traditional legal information services are not satisfactory, and
consequently computerized systems are being considered as part over a
general overhaul.
The Department of Library and Information Studies, University
College of Dublin, made in 1981-82 an 18-month study of the
feasability of introducing a computerized service. In this study two
text retrieval systems - the Swedish system 3RIP (which has several
strong aspects, and is an untraditional text retrieval system in many
ways) and the Northern-Irish system QUILL - were tested. Though the
study was terminated autumn 1982, a subsequent initiative has not been
reported.
[Page 395 ]
7.15 Israel
Israel does actually lack a national computerized information
service, but should be mentioned in respect of the major research
project - the Responsa project. Its data base is composed of responsa,
which are sources of Jewish law. Though the main thrust of the project
is research, the system is used also for actual resarch - not only in
law, but also in history, language and sociology.
The project is described in some detail above at sect 5.4.3.
| Adress: | | Bar-Ilan University |
Institute for Information Retrieval and Computational
Linguistics
The Responsa Porject
RAMAT-GAN - Israel
A few years ago, a "Jewish Law Service" was introduced in
association with the project. This handles requests from judges and
lawyers, giving them a draft opinion based on the sources retrieved by
the system.
In 1982 a copy of the system (data bases and programs) was
installed in Chicago, allowing Jewish law and Jewish studies scholars
in North-America direct access to the system by telecommunication.
[Page 396 ]
7.16 Italy
7.16.1 Introduction
There is an impressive activity going on within the field of
computers and law in Italy. It would not be an exaggeration to
maintain that at present, this is the country where the enthusiasm is
highest and the activity broadest in Europe - especially in respect to
legal information services. Ciampi (1982:16) estimates that some
2.000.000 documents are available through the Italian legal
information services (cfr Ciampi 13-14 for a tabular description of
the data bases).
The interest in the field dates back to 1962, when the first papers
were published (Frosini 1972), and the Center for automatic
documentation was founded in Milan (Ciampi 1974:693). This center has
been mainly dedicated to solving documentation problems in the legal
field, owing to the strong representation of lawyers on its board and
staff. Among the projects undertaken by this center, one should
mention the creation of a pilot model for computerized retrieval on a
data base of fiscal law, performance tests for classification systems,
and experiments with a system for the automatic classification of
legal texts (the OROI project), Ciampi 1974:695 with further
references.
At the end of the 1960ies, the Centro di Giuscibernetica (at the
university of Turin) was established under the directorship of
professor Mario G Losano. For a period, the Turin institution
published a journal, Systema. At present (1984) professor
Losano lectures at the University of Milan.
Several universities take an interest in computers and law and
organize courses - though there is yet no dedicated chair. The courses
are integratred in the computer science degree (universities of Bari,
Pisa, Salerne and Turin), in the economic and political science degree
(in universities of Bologne, Milan and at others), in the licenciate
of law degree
[Page 397 ]
(universities of Bologne, Florence, Milan, Perouse and Rome). In
addition there is given post-graduate courses by the IDG at Florence
(see below), and for civil servants there are courses at the
administrative university at Caserte - cfr Ciampi 1978, a survey which
still (March 1984) is current.
A recent development has been the use of the Italian videotex
service for developing a legal information service. The initiative was
taken by Consiglo nazionale dei dottori commercialisti, which
established a Commissione informatica. This commission has established
a Banca dati tributari on fiscal law. The current data base (Coretti
1983:18) includes legislation, Community directives, income tax, value
added tax, indirect tax, municipality law in respect to tax, etc. The
commission has ambitions to elaborate the system and make different
search strategies available, for instance an alphabetical index.
It should also be mentioned that some user research has been
conducted in Italy. A rather general study is Rawlence 1975, while
Ragona/Spinosa/Stoppoloni/Tesi 1983 is more oriented towards
computerized services.
However, there are some problems also in Italy. Ciampi (1982:17-18)
points out that currently the large legislative data bases are
maintained by two organizations in parallel, that some data bases of
literature are parts of three different systems, that there is a lack
of coordination and lack of certain criteria for selection. He
therefore suggests to establish mechanisms for closer cooperation and
coordination.
This view may, however, be contrasted by Technical Study II
1978:66, which states that
"... there is coordination and data exchange between the
legal data bases and other centres ... which is not found anywhere
else in Europe in the legal field."
[Page 398 ]
7.16.2 ITALGIURE
The ITALGIURE project originated within the Corte suprema di
cassazione, which annually decides some 12.000 cases. These decisions
have since 1924 been processed by the Ufficio del Massimario e del
Ruolo in order to extract from the decision a "massime" of the legal
principles expressed by the decision - Schlagboehmer 1975:63-66
discusses the functions of this office. The objective is to satisfy
the information needs of the judges themselves, and guarantee
consistency in the decisions, Ciampi 1974:706.
The "massime" is prepared by specialists at the court.
During the period 1942-49 there were attempts at having the judge
himself prepare the "massime". This was not found successful - the
"massima" became too specific in respect of facts and too abstract in
respect to law, Ciampi 1974:723.
The "massime" averages approximately 1.200 characters (15 lines)
with a title and classification number, replacing the ratio decidendi
of the decision. The decision itself averages some 15 pages (Borruso
1973:32).
Before making a decision, the judge must consult the accumulated
volume of "massima". It is easy to imagine that this became a slow and
laborious task as the years passed - and that the volume of "massima"
offered itself as a tempting data base for a computerized system.
The critical comments of Ciampi (1974:711-713, 721-725)
are of interest when it comes to establishing a perspective on the
ITALGIURE system. He points out that in publishing the decisions, the
selection criteria are obscure, and that the authentic text of a
decision is often replaced by a "massime" or an extract. In principle
this may lead to the result that (1) the volume of published decisions
lacks representativity or even objectivity; and (2) that the source
function is impaired as the published massime or extract replaces the
authentic text. In this respect, ITAL-GIURE should at least neuralize
the first of these risks, increasing sharply the publication
[Page 399 ]
ratio. The second is more problematic, and would seem to
require a supplementing document delivery service. Ciampi (1974:723)
points out that the ITALGIURE system has been developed initially as
an information system for "massima", and that the basic question of
how best to design documents for representing the decisions of the
court, has not been discussed explicitly in respect to ITAL-GIURE and
the new technology.
The work on the ITALGIURE system started in 1963-64 under the
direction of judge Renato Borruso, and the first experiment took place
21 March 1969. In 1970, the court acquired a computer (an UNIVAC 9300,
cfr Laporta 1973:25). It resulted in an online text retrieval system
which is known as ITALGIURE-FIND, running on Univac (1106) computers.
The system is operated by the Centro elettronico di documentazione
(CED) of the Corte suprema di cassazione on the initiative of the
Ufficio del massimario, which was founded 12 February 1973 (Gonella
1973). The ITALGIURE system does, perhaps, own much of its
considerable success to the enthusiasm and activity of its staff,
symbolized by the director of the CED, judge Vittorio Novelli.
| Adress: | | Centro elettronico di documentazione |
Corte suprema di Cassazione
Palazzo di Giustizia
Via Ulpiano 8
I-00193 ROMA - Italy
Several working parties have been established within the CED with
participation from other lawyers, among these:
| Work | team for the
legislation data banks |
| Work | team for the
criminal subject data banks |
| Work | team for
constitution documentation |
The CED work team for international relations
| Work | team for
bibliographical data banks |
| Work | team for
"giurisprudenza di merito" (decisions of lower courts, like preture,
tribunali, and corti d'appello other than the supreme court.
|
| Work | team for
different sources |
| Work | team for
informatics and the legal system |
[Page 400 ]
| Work | team for national
and international data networks |
| Work | team for
"ecologia e territorio" (environment) |
| Work | team for studying
the classification of data according to subject |
| Work | team for
Community law and court decisions |
| Work | team for taxation
|
| Work | team for internal
automation of services of the supreme court |
| Work | team for the
ENLEX project |
This is not a system only for the court. ITALGIURE should be
considered a national legal information system, and is at present
(1983) - at least in some respects - the largest such system in
Europe.
The most original aspect of the system, is the construction of the
thesaurus. This basic thesaurus philosophy makes ITALGIURE somewhat
akin to an indexing system - but as Borruso himself points out (for
instance 1973:40) the selected method is quite different from a
conventional indexing scheme.
In principle the thesaurus consists of all Italian words. The
meaning of these words are then described (or defined) by a small set
of basic words, called "semi del linguaggio" or "seeds of language",
Borruso 1973:35-36 for a characterization of a "seed".
It would seem that the process starts with a manually identified
lemma of the word, Borruso 1978:740. Also, grammatical variations of
the same word are handled by the thesaurus (three types of regular
verbs, adjectives, regular substantives of femininum and masculinum,
Borruso 1978:744, as well as some prefixes (cfr Borruso 1978:753 and
755 for the two "roses" of lemma and prefixes, indicating the scope of
the ITALGIURE system).
Each lemma is then defined by seeds. An example is given by Borruso
1978:779:
| Lemma | | | Traduzione in semi |
| morte | | | cessazione vita |
| immortalita' | | | tempo posteriorita" futuro cessazione vita possibilita'
mancanza |
| estinguer | | | cessazione vita distruzione
|
[Page 401 ]
Another example of how this definition by seeds works, is given by
Borruso 1973:34-35, 1974:10, 1978:798. The word "incendiary" will be
represented by the "seed combination" "fire and (destruction
or diffusion)".
There are approximately 3.500 such "seeds" (Borruso 1974:9, Ciampi
1982:11), and they gererate the total vocabulary which has increased
from 20.000 words (1968) to an expected 50.000 words (Tapper
1973:195).
A detailed description of the thesaurus, as well as the
rest of the ITALGIURE system is included in Borruso 1978.
Through the seed definitions, the problems of synonymity,
homonymity and hierarchical relationships are resolved. The seeds are
organized in hierarchies; a general word will thereby imply all the
specific words - for instance the word "animal" will include the word
"dog", though the use of the word "dog" will not include the word
"animal".
The thesaurus is also used to solve some geographical and
historical problems. For instance, retrieving on "England" will get
the user documents containg only the word "London"; retrieving on
"Switzerland"; the user will retrieve document containing only phrases
like "the Helvetic Confederation" or "Canton Ticino" (examples from
Giannantonio 1983:16).
Italian is one language having problems with phrases - for instance
phrases with a special, legal use and meaning. As an example of a
syntagm, or what he calls "diabolical combinations", Borruso (1973:36)
mentions "purchase tax". An Italian example is "diritto soggettivo",
which used as two search terms combined with a Boolean and
would result in "una massa enorme di documenti giuridici" (Borruso
1978:685 at note 1). ITALGIURE-FIND does not have a general distance
operator, but about 1.000 such syntagms have been identified manually,
and they may be used as single search terms. Programs are under
development to monitor user dialog, and - when finding that several
users are requiring the identical syntagm, which does not exist in the
table, the system will establish this automatically.
[Page 402 ]
Ciampi (1982:11) points out limitations of the thesaurus today. It
is not maintained regulary (cfr also Technical Study II 1977:66) and
the language reflected is based on the "massima", which is only part
of the legal language of Italy. Another problem of the thesaurus is
its strong multiplication effect: Due to the hierarchical structure
and the automatic inclusion of narrower terms and derviates of the
seeds, the initial search request becomes imprecise and uncontrollable
for the user. This may, in fact, be the main reason for its infrequent
use.
Currently there is work going on for making it possible
to look up in the thesaurus itself from the terminal, and derive
information on words specified by the user. The thesaurus will also be
maintained in an online environment (Rita 1983).
Giannantonio (1983:17) also reports that a synonym thesaurus has
been developed in the same way through analysis of saved dialogues.
These are examples of how ITALGIURE developes into a more intelligent
system. We also consider it worthwhile attempting to exploit the
information of the search requests, which few other systems seem to
have tried.
Proposals are being considered to use the thesaurus for
facilitating access to the system for non-Italian users, extending the
definitions by synonyms in other languages.
It has also been reported that work is initiated to include
"alarms" in documents in order to make the user aware of a link
between the retrieved document and another document in one of the data
bases. These alarms are specified manually, and a total of 100.000
such alarms are foreseen.
The data base has the three traditional types of legal sources -
legislation, case law, and legal literature. A detailed discussion of
the state of the data base is found in Borruso 1978:1035-1558. The
document design varies between the files, and Technical Study II
1977:66 reports that users find the lack of coordination difficult.
For legislation, a first set of files contains titles for
legislation and other legal instruments published in Raccolta
Officiate (the official gazette) since
[Page 403 ]
1861. A second set of files contain the authentic text of
national and regional legislation.
For case law, the decisions of the constitutional court, the
supreme court (civil and criminal decisions), decisions of local
courts, the council of state, the audit service, the military
tribunals and the tax commission. Included are also decisions of the
Court of Justice in Luxembourg of the European Communities and
decisions of the European Commission on Human Rights.
For legal literature, all legal books printed in Italy and
deposited at the Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale, Florence, since 1975;
selected information on books procured by the Library of Congress,
Washington; abstracts of legal papers from more than 200 Italian legal
journals; references to court decisions in the literature; and the
JURE data bank of IDG (cfr above). Cfr Castagnone 1983 for a
discussion on this part of the data base. Ciampi (1982:17) maintains
that there is some lack of coordination between the various
bibliographical files.
Additional data banks contain ministerial circulars; collective
labour contracts (since 1978); data on lawyers members of the Italian
bar and law society; and legislation, case law and literature
pertinent to environmental law (this is related to the ENLEX project
of the European Communities, in which CED is one of the project
partners).
There are plans to translate the titles of documents, at least of
case law, to other languages to facilitate access by foreign users
(Giannantonio 1983:21-23).
The system is terminal-oriented, engaging the user in a dialog.
Search terms are selected without any restrictions, and may be
combined by a full range of Boolean operators and distance operators.
Borruso (for instance 1978:715-716) recommends a structure of the
search request very similar to the one first proposed by Horty, and
which is also basic to the conceptorbased strategy discussed above at
sect 4.5.2 (3).
Truncation and a masking facility are available. The user may also
retrieve on fixed fields by using what ITALGIURE calls "retrieval
channels" - one channel corresponding to a field type.
[Page 404 ]
The search language of the original ITALGIURE-FIND system was
perhaps not too user friendly. In 1976, the Institution of electrical
engineers (INSPEC) was engaged to adjust the ITALGIURE command
language to the recommendation of the Common Command Language of the
European Communities. At present, CCL as well as the original
ITALGIURE-FIND commands (in the FIND II version) can be used for
retrieval (Giannantonio 1983:21).
FIND II still is a typical "descriptor oriented"
retrieval language, and therefore not ideal for text retrieval. Most
of the retrieval operations can only be made sequentially in a subset
of documents after first having defined this subset by the previous
search request. If in the course of the dialog the user wishes to
extend the search request (for instance by using a new or-operator),
the user has to restart the retrieval operation.
The user determines whether the thesaurus shall be engaged or not.
If engaged, the thesaurus automatically transforms the search terms to
seeds or combinations of seeds. The user may also modify the automatic
transformation.
The system gives the usual kind of feedback to the user, but have
also the possibility of some refinements - for instance "spectrum
analysis", showing how the retrieved documents are distributed
according to the values of the field ("channel") selected by the user,
for instance date, author, or document type (cfr Ciampi 1982:10).
ITALGIURE is available by terminal. As Italy does not have a public
data transmission network, the CED has had to create a special network
for ITALGIURE. Within the Italian telephone company (SIP),
concentrators were established in the exchanges of Turin, Milan,
Venice, Bologna, Naples, Bari, and Catania. Through leased line, the
CED computer and the concentrators were linked (the network made
possible transmission rates of 4.800 or 9.600 bauds), and the
concentrators and terminals were linked with leased lines used for
1.200 bauds transmission - corresponding to 47 trunk lines, each
having 3-4 terminals (Giannantonio 1983:10-11).
[Page 405 ]
By 1978 more than 200 terminals were connected to the system, and
in 1982 the number was increased to 400 (Ciampi 1982:10) and by 1983
it is reported to be approximately 500 with 400 requests for access
pending. For 1984-85 an expansion to an additional 1.000 terminals in
the public sector and 1.200 in local administration is regarded as
possible. All Italian courts are now linked to the service. The
Consiglio superiore della magistratura, which is the highest authority
for Italian judges, has in guidelines of 14 December 1979 recommended
procedures etc within the court for making best possible use of the
service. It is, for instance, emphasized that the terminal should be
placed
"... in easily accessible premises, adequately drawn to
the attention of all those authorized to use it, in addition to the
judges, lawyers, notaries, accountants ... taking care that an ...
employee is always available in the ... premises" for helping in using
the service.
This may be a response to the problem identified by Technical Study
II 1977:69, which maintained that one of ITALGIURE's biggest problems
at that time was to be found at the level of terminal office
organization.
Originally its services were restricted to courts and public
agencies. But 21 May 1981, the president of Italy issued a regulation
(statutory instrument 322) which granted the public in general access
to the ITALGIURE services (cfr art 1). This required an upgrading of
the network, which took place 1981-82. The concentrators are now
replaced by "intelligent concentrators" (Sperry Univac DCP 40) in
Milan, Turin, Venice, Bologna, Naples and Catania. Also, they are
connected by a mesh network to introduce redundancy for increased
reliability.
The cited regulation of 1981 defined four categories of users. For
the first category (government agencies in a broad sense) access is
free of charge, users of the three other categories have to pay an
annual flat fee between one and two million lire.
The terminals at the courts are made available to lawyers free of
charge, usually also with a
[Page 406 ]
para-legal which will instruct in the use of the terminal and the
search language. The chambers of commerce have indicated interest in
establishing bureaux for the occational user, and in this context a
fee of approximately 2.500 lire per question has been indicated.
It is estimated that there are 250.000 potential professional users
of ITALGIURE in Italy, counting the members of the national and
regional legislative assemblies, judges, lawyers, notaries,
para-legals, academic lawyers and employees of public agencies (Ciampi
1982:16).
The number of "retrieval operations" increased from 46.984 for 1974
to 212.818 in 1978 and 370.305 in 1981 (Giannantonio 1983:2). A
"retrieval operation" is neither a search request nor a terminal
session, but any simple input activity of a user.
Since 1981 ITALGIURE has also been available through EURONET - the
actual connection was made 20 December 1980.
The ITALGIURE is in close contact with is users, and every fifth
year a big conference is organized with participants from all over the
world. It is no exaggeration to point this out as the major event in
the area of legal information services. The conferences so far have
been:
| 1973: | | Convegno sulla diffusione delle informazioni giuridiche con
l'ausilio degli elaboratori elettronici (Atti 1973) |
| 1978: | | 2
convegno sul tema "L'nformatica giuridica al servizio del Paese" (Atti
1978) |
| 1983: | | 3
congresso internazionale sul tema "L'informatica giurdica e le
comunita' nazionali ed internazionali" (Atti 1983) |
The ITALGIURE maintains a number of international contacts. It has
taken on work for the European Communities (cfr on the ENLEX project
above at sect 7.1.4). An agreement between the Intergovernmental Burau
of Informatics (IBI) and the Italian government made in 1982 a
parallel system available in Argentine (cfr above at sect 7.1.2 and
7.2), and the agreement opens for similar transfers in the future.
[Page 407 ]
7.16.3 Istituto per la documentazione giurdica (IDG)
The most important research institution today is the Istituto per
la documentazione giuridica (IDG - Institute for Legal Documentation),
which was established by the Consiglio nazionale delle richerche 1968
in Florence as a permanent institution.
| Adress: | | Istituto per la documentazione giurdica |
Via Panciatichi 56/16
I-50127 FIRENZE - Italy
Under the directorship of Costantino Ciampi, the Sezione di
documentazione automatica (later named the Reparto d'informatica) of
the IDG has contributed in several ways to the field of conferences -
its international conference on "Logica, informatica, diritto" in
April 1981, is one of the more important events in the brief history
of deontic systems (Ciampi 1982, Martino 1982).
Its most visible contribution is the publication of the journal
Informatica e diritto, an international journal on computers
and law with papers in several languages, published quarterly since
1974. The journal consists of two parts, one which brings papers and
other items of interest, another containing an international
bibliography on computers and law, known as Bibliografia
internazionale di informatica e diritto (BID). This is constructed
through contracts with several centers and individuals throughout the
world, and does for instance - cover Eastern European and Scandinavian
literature, languages which otherwise are less accessible to
international readers.
The Informatica e diritto succeeded the first
journal of IDG, Bollettino bibliografico d'informatica generale e
applicata al diritto, which was published 1972-73.
IDG also has created its own information system for bibliographical
records - and one of these data bases are actually the BID, Ciampi
1974:732. For the BID, a structured thesaurus of descriptors has been
developed (THES/BID), being the first major attempt to make such a
structure within the area of computers and law The system may prove
useful for those needing such a
[Page 408 ]
structure for library or other purposes (cfr Ciampi 1982:55 - the
thesaurus is also published).
A more general bibliographical data base known as JURE has been
established, containing "Dottrina e dibattito giurdico", corresponding
to one of the literature files of ITALGIURE (cfr Borruso 1978:1569 at
note 1) and based on an analysis of some 200 journals. Work on this
system started in 1970 (cfr Jannucci/Ragona/Spinosa/Elmi 1977:77 and
Jannucci/Ragona/Spinosa/Elmi 1978 - who include a discussion of
document construction and auxilliary word and text processing
programs). In 1980 IDG started to produce printed "abstract journals"
based on this system, and has followed up with a user study which has
probably given input for further revision (cfr
Ragona/Spinosa/Stoppoloni 1983).
This system employs the IBM text retrieval system STAIRS at the
Centro nazionale universitario di calcolo elettronico (CNUCE) of Pisa,
which is also an institute of the national research council's
structure. IDG has plans for supplementing the STAIRS installation by
TLS - the "Thesaurus and Linguistic Integrated System" available for
STAIRS.
The JURE data base is also channeled into the ITAL-GIURE system,
where it is available as data bases (DOTTR) and into the the computer
center of the Camera dei deputati, where they constitute the DOCT data
base (cfr Ciampi 1982:12).
7.16.4 Camera dei deputati
Within the Camera dei deputati - the Italian parliament's lower
legislative body - was created a computer service in 1969. In 1974,
this was developed into an independent department named Schedario
generale elettronico, which was again in 1978 renamed, more
appropriately Centro per la documentazione automatica (CDA) which is
currently directed by dr Rodolfo Pagano.
| Adress: | | Centro per la documentazione automatica |
Camera dei deputati
I-00 100 ROMA - Italy
[Page 409 ]
The center has several tasks (cfr Pagano 1978), but in our context,
the interest revolved around what initially was known as the Camera
'72 project.
In 1972, the Camera dei deputati established a Comitato per
l'elaborazione automatica dei dati (CEAD). This committee was to
explore the possibility of establishing not only a legislative
information retrieval system for the parliament, but also a more
general service for the statutes. At this time, ITALGIURE was still a
project within the Corte suprema di cassazione.
The Camera '72 project had as its objective to make both national
and regional statutes available in a computerized system. The start
was made with regional statutes, and the center established a data
base of more than 100.000 documents of regional statutes.
An agreement was reached between the Camera dei deputati and the
Corte superiore di cassazione of a division of labour (Pagano
1978:23), under which the Camera dei deputati supplied the regional
statutes, while the ITALGIURE organization took care of the national
legislation. Consequently the legislative data base of ITALGIURE is
fed also by the computer center of the parliament. The data base of
Camera dei deputati will, on the other hand, in due time receive the
national statutes (Ciampi 1982:11).
The parliament did, however, create an information system which
perhaps, strictly speaking, falls outside the scope of our book, being
more a legislative information system. This system is based on the IBM
text retrieval system STAIRS run on an IBM 4341 and accessed by some
60 terminals (Ciampi 1982:11).
The data base of regional legislation is supplemented by the file
on legal literature from IDG, which also is originally established
under STAIRS (see above).
The main point of interest may be the way in which the Camera dei
deputati have developed special linguistic programs within the
computer center. Each word in the legislative file has been reduced to
a lemma, and the various meanings in context has been assigned through
a mixed automated-manual procedure. Synonyms, antonyms and "equivalent
words" have been specified
[Page 410 ]
for each basic entry. A discussion may be found in Russi 1978.
The identification of lemmae is effected semi-automatically by
using a computerized dictionary developed in cooperation with the
linguistic department of CNUCE in Pisa (Ciampi 1982:11).
The system also includes a reference file of the legislative
history, and historic versions of documents are stored and may be
retrieved through explicit choices made by the assistance of the
reference file.
It should also be mentioned that the computer center
publishes a general journal on computers and law, which started out as
a quite modest publication (named INFORMAzione automaTICA), but
which is today a well-produced journal of considerable interest titled
Notiziario di informatica, edited by dr Anna Cuzzer.
[Page 411 ]
7.17 Japan
To our knowledge, there are no operating legal information
retrieval system in Japan at present. There is, however, an interest
in computers and law - which is indicated by the presence of The Law
and Computers Association. This Association also publishes a journal,
the first issue which appeared in 1983.
| Adress: | | The
Law and Computers Association of Japan |
Dauilu-hoki Bldg
2-11-17 Minami Aoyama
Minato-ku
TOKYO 107 - Japan
[Page 412 ]
7.18 Luxemburg
Luxemburg has no national computerized legal service at the moment.
There is, however, established cooperation with the Belgian retrieval
service CREDOC, which maintains Luxemburgian law in one of its data
bases. This is briefly mentioned in the description of CREDOC under
the national entry for Belgium.
[Page 413 ]
7.19 Mexico
7.19.1 Introduction
Mexico is a federal country of 31 states, and with the complexity
of legislation and regulation generally encountered in federal
jurisdictions.
In 1982, the first national conference on computers and law was
organized in Mexico City, in cooperation between the government and
the regional organization of the Intergovernmental Bureau for
Informatics (IBI), the Centro Regional para America Latina y el Caribe
(CRALC).
Evidently the federal government used this conference to construct
a platform for further planning. The government is considering whether
the introduction of a national, computerized system actually may be a
short-cut to achieve a more efficient legal system in Mexico. On the
basis of an internal report, the Mexican government has in 1983 been
gathering further information in Europe - and a decision is expected
in the near future (of autumn 1983).
7.19.2 UNAM-JURE
The Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico (UNAM) is a huge
university, with considerable resources both in terms of expertise and
otherwise. In 1940, an Institute de Investigaciones Juridicas was
established at UNAM, and within this institute, there is a Centro de
Legislacion y Jurisprudencia, which plays an important role in keeping
track of Mexican law.
| Adress: | | Institutio de Investigaciones Juridicas |
UNAM
Torre II de Humanidades
Ciudad Universitatia
MEXICO 20, DF - Mexico
[Page 414 ]
This center considered using computerized methods for documenting
Mexican law. A link was established to the French research institution
IRETIJ at the University of Montpellier. Two of the center's staff -
Claude Belair (who is responsible for the computerization project) and
Guillermo Aguilar Alvarez, brought back methods and systems as a point
of departure (Carpizo 1983:5).
By 1982, some 5.000 documents of federal legislation had been made
into a data base. The system runs on the Burroghs installation of
UNAM, and is programmed in ALGOL (Belair/Matute/Aguilar 1983:20).
In its initial version the system is derived from the JURIDOC
system of Montpellier, also in respect to the document analysis etc.
Plans for the future are quite exciting, and include experiments with
retrieval based on fuzzy sets, cluster analysis and methods from
artificial intelligence (Belair/Matute/Aguilar 1983:27-28).
[Page 415 ]
7.20 New Zealand
The initiative in New Zealand has been taken by professor John
Miller of the Faculty of Law at Victoria University, Wellington. At
this university there has been established a project known as CLIRS,
an obvious abbreviation for Computerized Legal Information Retrieval
System.
Victoria University
WELLINGTON - New Zealand
The data base has been established using decisions by the Court of
Appeal and headnotes of the New Zealand Law Reports supplemented by
some statutory material, tribunal and patent decisions. Case and
legislation notes are being incorporated (Miller 1983:3).
The system used is the IBM text retrieval system STAIRS, which has
been provided free of charge to the university computing center for a
period of two years. It can only be accessed by terminals within the
university - consequently only staff, students and practitioners who
have access to the University library are able to use the system in
the initial stage. An extention outside the University is planned,
however.
The test period commenced early 1983, and experiments are scheduled
for late 1983.
The CLIRS project is parallelled by initiatives by the New Zealand
Law Society and the Government, both which have set up committees to
assess their need for information retrieval services. The various
efforts are coordinated through the CLIRS project, and it is thought
that reports from the committees will be available at the end of 1983.
Cooperation with the New Zealand Council of Law Reporting has also
to be established, as this organization is the only body allowed to
publish reports from the superior courts. This make the permission of
[Page 416 ]
the Council mandatory for the operation of CLIRS (Miller 1983:2).
Miller also points out that the New Zealand system would profit
from links to other data bases - especially UK systems, but also
Australia.
[Page 417 ]
7.21 Norway
7.21.1 Introduction
In Norway, developments of legal information services started out
of academic interest. In 1970, professor Knut S Selmer at the Faculty
of Law, University of Oslo, took an initiative in launching a research
effort in computers and law. He recruited Jon Bing, at that time
working as a research assistant at the Department for Private Law. In
March, 1970 the first conference on legal information retrieval
systems were organized by the Department (Bing 1970), and in 1971 the
activity was organized within the Norwegian Research Center for
Computers and Law, first as a section of the Department for Private
Law, and from 1983 as an independent department of the faculty.
Professor Selmer is still the chairman of the NRCCL with Jon Bing as
associate professor.
| Adress: | | Norwegian Research Center for Computers and Law |
Niels Juels gate 16
OSLO 2 - Norway
The work of the NRCCL has since the beginning been aimed at
research, not at developing any particular text retrieval system. In
the beginning, the NRCCL actually simulated text retrieval by using a
suite of batch oriented programs known as PROTEST. Currently the NRCCL
is using a specially adapted version of NOVA*STATUS extended by the
program known as VEXT allowing vector based retrieval and facilitating
controlled experiments in text retrieval. Also a number of auxilliary
programs have been developed, and small experimental data bases are
being maintained for research purposes.
The research of the NRCCL is organized in a program known as NORIS,
and ranges from theoretical studies to controlled experiments and user
research. The program has been briefly described above in sect 5.4.6,
and will not be further discussed here. A review of the results
1970-79 may be found in
[Page 418 ]
Bing/Selmer 1980:119-296. Publications for the NRCCL are
published in the CompLex series of reports or the special series of
monographs, both maintained by the Norwegian University Press, cfr
below.
The history of text retrieval programs are closely associated with
the interest taken in these systems by the Government Institution of
Organization and Management (Statens rasjonaliseringsdirektorat),
which is a consulting and coordinating government agency with a
special responsibility with respect to data processing. The director
of that department of the GIOM, K&re Fl&isand, realized quite early
that suitable text retrieval systems had to be available for the
public administration in order to encourage a development in a
direction of integrated text and document processing.
| Adress: | | Government Institution for Organization and Management
|
PO Box 8115 Dep
OSLO 1 - Norway
Consequently, in 1975 the GIOM bought the rights to the British
STATUS I text retrieval system. The system was further developed in
Norway, incorporating facilities found desirable like conceptor based
retrieval strategies. The resulting version was implemented on a
number of computer systems, including all university intallations, and
was given the name NOVA*STATUS (an acronym for "Norsk versjon av
STATUS"). It is estimated that the current version retains less than
30 per cent of the original coding.
NOVA*STATUS was widely used and was in many respect a very
successful program. It supported the first examples of minor legal
information services: Within the consumer administration NOVA*STATUS
is used by the Consumer Council for a system documenting appeal cases,
and for the Consumer Ombudsman it is used for a system documenting
precedents and decisions by the Market Court. Within the Ministry of
Justice, it was used for a system documenting the Ministry's decisions
in respect of the law of land registries.
In spite of this limited success, it was found that a better text
retrieval system was desirable. In 1980, the specifications of such a
system was published by the GIOM, the system being given the name
SIFT, an
[Page 419 ]
acronym for "searching in free text". On this basis, a project
was established with the GIOM as director and the NRCCL, Lawdata, the
Center for Humanistic Data Processing at the University of Bergen and
the Norwegian computer manufacturer, Norsk Data (ND) as participants.
Initial development funds were made available from the Research
Council for Industry and Technology (NTNF), but the substance of the
funds has been drawn from the GIOM.
The SIFT system is designed to be easily portable, to be modular,
to have a file structure optimizing the conflicting objectives of
efficient retrieval and updating, to have powerful help-functions and
a simple, but flexible user interface. It allows for flexible and
complex document formats and data base definitions, allowing for
instance several document types in the same data base, and
concatination of data base by user request. It allows browsing in
historical versions of the documents, and also the use of external
text files. It may be characterized as a stateof-the-art text
retrieval system.
The system is currently (spring 1984) available in a prototype
version, and has been implemented on an experimental basis in the
Council of Europe, Strasbourg and several Norwegian installations. It
has gererated some international interest, and will certainly be used
(and further developed) for legal information retrieval within Norway.
The most interesting thing of the SIFT project is perhaps the focal
point it has provided developing text retrieval systems and associated
programs in Norway, an interest which draws on a number of
institutions and which is closely related to legal applications.
In 1980 a Norwegian Association for Computers and Law was founded.
The NACAL organizes conferences and meetings, and also maintains
subscription schemes for the series of reports within the field of
computers and law published by the Norwegian University press, the
CompLex serie's. The CompLex reports mainly on NRCCL projects, but
includes also reports from other institutions like LAWDATA, the Data
Inspectorate, the Ministry of Justice, NACAL itself etc.
[Page 420 ]
| Adress: | | Norwegian Association for Computers and Law |
PO Box 7557 Skillebekk
OSLO 2 - Norway
Also in 1979, a Legal Information Council (Rådet for
rettsinformation) was created. The Council has as its members the
major users of legal information services within the government as
well as the professional bodies and law faculties. The Council was
formally created as an advisory council to the Ministry of Justice,
the chief executive of the Ministry, Leif Eldring, being appointed
chairman and the Department for Planning and Budget being secretary to
the council. This council is to act as a policy-making forum,
discussing all issues somehow related to legal information systems,
manual as well as computerized.
| Adress: | | Ministry of Justice |
Department of Planning and Budget
PO Box 8005 Dep
OSLO 1 - Norway
To this complex picture of relevant organizations should be added
that of Lawdata, discussed below. At the moment this structure is
perhaps the most characteristic feature of the Norwegian situation. It
has not come about by chance, but by planning.
One will notice that the NRCCL has remained a research institution,
founded mainly through projects and carefully avoiding responsibility
for operating legal information retrieval system. This arrangement is
created in order to prevent that research priorities would conflict
with those priorities considered necessary to adopt by an operative
organization. The operative organization is Lawdata, offering a
general legal information service. The Council of Legal Information is
sufficently broad to resolve policy issues and provide a forum for
discussions of possible disagreements. The Government Institution for
Organization and Management has provided a basis for the development
of computer programs. And the Norwegian Association of Computers and
Law provides an informal forum for any interested person or
institution to meet and discuss the issues.
It is hoped that this rather complex structure nevertheless
provided two things: A functional
[Page 421 ]
division of responsibilities and an invironment were differences
of opinions and priorities will ensure further dynamics and
developments.
7.21.2 Lawdata
The background of Lawdata takes us back to the 1930ies. At that
time, the Faculty of Law at the University of Oslo (which was then the
only Norwegian law faculty) suggested to the government that a
consolidated compilation of the Acts of parliament should be composed
and published regulary. The government did not wish to make this
effort, but granted the faculty a small loan. The faculty created a
foundation (which in principle was private, but owned by the faculty),
and using the facilities of the faculty, a compilation was created.
This immideately became widely used because of its completeness and
quality. The foundation paid back its loan, and from then on the
publication has been secured. The foundation is an anomaly in its
conception, being neither private nor public, and can be explained
only by its rather curious history.
The compilation of statutes in force was still being published in
the 1970ies, with one volume of approximately 3.000 pages (some 13
million characters) published bi-annually and still proving to be of
considerable economic interest. It was maintained in the oldfashioned
way by keeping the text in lead, and for each edition making the
amendments necessary in the consolidated text by replacing or
supplementing the text before making up the pages all over.
In the early 1970ies, it became evident that a total new version
had to be produced simply because the lead were worn down. Actually,
the last couple of editions was printed by taking one master imprint
from the lead and then producing the actual books in offset from this
master copy. Therefore, in 1975, the NRCCL on commission from the
foundation designed a computerized system for the maintenance of the
compilation. This was also designed for the additional objective of
providing the basis of a computerized legal information system.
[Page 422 ]
The foundation established in 1979 an office for the changeover to
computerized technology, naming this office Lovdata (an Norwegian
acronym for Lovsamlingens datakontor) or Lawdata. They recruited as
director Trygve Harvold - at that time working within the Ministry of
Justice and formely a research fellow specializing in the theory of
text retrieval systems at the NRCCL.
Niels Juels gate 16
OSLO 2 - Norway
Lawdata made the changeover by having the most current version
(1979) of the compilation read optically by a Kurzweil Data Entry
Machine in Stockholm. This was itself an interesting experiment, as
the printing quality was low and the number of fonts high. Though the
costs saved in money eventually was not major compared to re-keying
the whole text, the savings in administration and time were
considerable. The material was proof-read and supplemented by the
legislation in the next two year period. Lawdata published the 1981
edition of the compilation with a saving of approximately 5 months
compared to the old method.
In 1981, Lawdata also was made into an independent, non-profit
foundation. This was achieved through an agreement between the Faculty
of Law at the University of Oslo and the Ministry of Justice. A board
with representatives from the two founders was established, and
supplemented with representatives of the Bar Association, the
Association of Judges and the Ministry of Administration and Consumer
Affaires. Professor Knut S Selmer, representing the Faculty of Law,
was made chairman of the board.
Though the initial objective of Lawdata had been the publishing of
the compilation of statutes in force, it had at the same time been
planning for a computerized service. In order to facilitate this,
special input formats had been adopted - a universal format designed
especially to be easy to handle by those entering the data (which have
mainly been law students) and with sufficient information both for
typographical uses and for creating appropriate documents for text
retrieval. Actually the Lawdata philosophy is characterized by keeping
the text as system
[Page 423 ]
independent as possible, and by integrating several uses of the
same text.
It may be of interest to note that the initial conversion
was made by a simple word processing program on a Norwegian micro
computer, MYCRON-1, which communicated to the Honeywell Bull mainframe
of the Government Computer Center. The ad hoc programming and
inventiveness of the small Lawdata staff was impressive.
The next big project was the establishment of a consolidated data
base of all regulations applying to the whole country. This included
the identification of regulations actually in force, something which
at that time was not known even to the ministries in question. Acting
on a contract with the Ministry of Justice, Lawdata established this
data base in the period 1982-83. The volume of this data base is
estimated to approximately 25 million characters.
Starting in 1982, Lawdata also produces the official gazette
(Lovtidend), which publishes all acts of parliament as well as all
regulations. In this way, data is captured at the source and
integrated in the existing data bases.
Currently, Lawdata has embarked on its third big project,
establishing a data base of all regulations applying to districts or
regions. This is foreseen to be terminated in 1985.
In addition to these major data bases, Lawdata has on contract
produced a number of smaller and specialized data bases.
In 1983, Lawdata launched its computerized legal information
service. The files included in this initial system, which is
characterized as experimental due to the limitations of the data base,
are:
NL - all statutes in force (20.000 documents), updated
within one week of publication.
SF - national regulations (30.000 documents), regulations
from 7 ministries (finance, industry, commerce, agriculture and
foreign affairs) - all other ministries to be added in the spring of
1984; updated within one month of publication.
[Page 424 ]
HRA - decisions by the supreme court (Høyesterett),
abstracts based on the case reporter (Retstidende) since 1961 (10.000
documents); updated within one month of publication. Extended back to
1946 in 1985.
Plans for extentions, apart from those noted above, include an
index to legal literature in 1984, full text of supreme court
decisions in 1984, and test data bases of administrative material in
1984.
Appeal and first instance court decisions will also eventually be
included. Lawdata is in this respect, however, awaiting the outcome of
the policy discussion within the Council of Legal Information. A
report on the future use of such decisions is expected in 1984 - and
this issue is somewhat controversial in Norway. Also, the introduction
of word processing equipment in all appeal courts within the end of
1984 will change the practical possibilities significantly.
It may be worth noting that Lawdata operates under a license from
the Data Inspectorate, and that the license is extended to saving the
search requests of the user for statistical and research purposes
(license of August 4th, 1983).
The Lawdata system is open to all users, and is operated on the
Honeywell Bull installation of the Government Computer Center (Statens
datasentral) under the text retrieval system NOVA*STATUS. Lawdata
actually runs a parallel version for internal purposes at its ND 500
installation. It is foreseen that Lawdata will make the transition to
SIFT 1984-85, and take an active part in the further development of
this system.
The rates are split in a monthly subscription fee currently (1984)
at 400 NOK, and a fee relative to the use of the system according to
the cost algorithm of the Government Computer Center with an addition
of 100 per cent to Lawdata. This amounts to approximately 400 NOK per
terminal hour.
The service is available by dial-up or leased lines, using several
communication protocols. At the end of 1983, Lawdata reported having
approximately 70
[Page 425 ]
subscribers, using the system each on an average of 3.5 hours pr
month.
[Page 426 ]
7.22 Spain
Spain is a country which quite early took an initiative, creating
an interesting information system for treaties - IBERTRAT, directed by
the Spanish Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The system was based on a
decret of 1972 (Etcheverria 1974:1) and inspired by the work of the
Council of Europe committee on legal data processing.
The project started in 1972 by manual preparation of input data of
the treaties, both bilateral and multilateral, of which Spain was a
party. The next phase known as IBERTRAT I - was to computerize the
results of the manual analysis - which would be a structured document
of indexing terms for each treaty. It was planned that data processing
would be batch oriented till 1976, when one planned to acquire a
mainframe for running the system (Etcheverria 1974:6). In 1974, the
phase known as IBERTRAT II or TITEB (an acronym for "texto integro de
los tratados en banda magneetica") would be realized, in which the
authentic text of treaties would be computerized. In this phase was
also included the establishment of a thesaurus (Etcheverria 1974:9).
The system was run on a Univac installation, but no report on the
software to be used is available.
No reports are available on the possible further development of the
IBERTRAT system. It is, however, still an interest in Spain for
computers and law, and there exists, for instance, an Asociacion de
Informatica y Derecho. Also a number of books have been published on
the subject.
The most concrete reports concern the CENDIJ (Centro de
documentacion e informatica juridica).
Fernando el Catolico, 1
MADRID 15 - Spain
In 1979 this organization was reported to offer a computerized
retrieval service. The data base was
[Page 427 ]
divided into three files:
Legislation; which included the constitution and statutes
published after 1979.
Jurisprudence; which included decisions of the Salas
Primera y Tercera of Tribunal Supremo (civil and fiscal law) since
1978; resolutions of the Direccion General de los Registros y del
Notariado since 1968; published resolutions of the Tribunal Economico
Administrative Central since 1966; resultions of the Consejo Superior
Bancario and circulars of the Banco de Espana; selected decisions and
resolutions in certain areas of commercial (since 1951) and fiscal law
(since 1967).
Bibliographical data; legal books since 1979, papers in
the most important journals since 1978 and some selected areas like
company law (since 1951), banking law (since 1951) and fiscal law
(since 1967).
CENDIJ was reported to cooperate with a number of other Spanish
organizations and legal information services of other countries. In
spite of this, reports have been scarce - and it is not known of its
current status or its relation to other Spanish initatives, like the
Centro de Informatica Aplicadda a la Documentacion y Derecho (CINADDE)
in Madrid. Literature also mentions a project known as SINADE
("Sistema Informatico para el analisis del Derecho", which was
initiated in 1975 and experiments of the Compania Telefonica Nacional
de Espana on teletext systems ("Teleinformatic Juridica"), Guanter
1977:518, 528.
[Page 428 ]
7.23 Sweden
7.23.1 Introduction
In 1973, Sweden passed the first national data protection
legislation, a reform which has become known world wide as a pinoneer
effort in respect to the protection of privacy in the computer age. To
some extent, the fame of the data protection legislation has eclipsed
the systematic work done in the field of legal informatics. Sweden was
probably the first country to adopt a plan for the development of a
national legal information system based on an initiative of the
Ministry of Justice in 1966.
Also in other respects, Sweden is a pioneer. Computers and law (or
"legal informatics") was made a compulsary subject for the law degree
in 1977. This is one of the results of the activities of professor
Peter Seipel, who since 1978 has held one of the few specialized
chairs in computers and law in Europe. In 1967 professor Seipel
created the Working Party for EDP and Law (Arbetsgruppen foer ADB och
juridik), and his early papers (Seipel 1970) are basic to the
Scandinavian development of computers and law. The research of
professor Seipel himself is of high quality and diversified within the
field of computers and law - and his perspective is summarized in his
thesis for the legal doctorate, also coining a new phrase by its
title, Computing Law (1977).
In 1981, the Swedish Law and Informatics Research Institute
(Institutet foer raettsinformatik) replaced the Working Party at the
faculty of law, University of Stockholm, with support from the Swedish
Research Council for the Humanities and the Social Sciences. The
research of this Institute is documented in a special series of
reports (IRI-rapporter), available from the Institute.
[Page 429 ]
| Adress: | | Swedish Law and Informatics Research Institute |
Faculty of Law
University of Stockholm
S-106 91 STOCKHOLM - Sweden
The research includes all areas of computers and law. In our
context, the user research on the Raettsdata system is of especial
interest. Highly interesting are also Seipel's studies on automatic
indexing (1976). In addition should be mentioned the work on
application of computational lingustics to legal texts. This effort is
carried out in cooperation with the linguistic department of the
University of Stockholm, in particular, with associate professor Benny
Brodda and doctor Gunnel Kaellgren.
For several years a cooperation has taken place with another
fascinating Swedish institution, the independent Research institute
for quantitative linguistics (Forskningsgruppen foer kvantitativ
lingvistik, or KVAL) of which Hans Karlgren is the enthusiastic and
encyclopedic director. KVAL is perhaps best known for its system of
trade mark matching, which is operated for the patent offices of
Finland, Holland, Norway, and Sweden. The cooperation, however,
comprises a number of additional relevant activities, among them the
development of the experimental text retrieval system POLYTEXT (in
cooperation with the Swedish Law and Informatics Research Institute
and Stanford Research Institute) using some of the techniques from the
research on artificial intelligence.
Sweden has an annotated publication of its major statutory
instruments in force, which is generally consulted as an authorative
system for all lawyers. This is published by PA Nordstedt & Soeners
Foerlag, a private and major legal publisher which at the moment
(1983) is considering an introduction of a computerized service of
some kind, possibly in cooperation with others - cfr SARI
1982:107-111.
The Working Party for EDP and Law - which gave way to the Swedish
Law and Informatics Research Institute - has also a successor in the
Swedish Association for Computers and Law (Svenska foereningen foer
ADB och juridik). This association organizes seminars and other
activities, and edits jointly (editors for the first volume being
Cecilia Magnusson and Olav
[Page 430 ]
Torvund) with the Norwegian association a Nordic yearbook for
computers and law (Juristen i datasamhaellet). The first volume
will be published by Nordstedt in the spring of 1984.
| Adress: | | Svenska Foereningen foer ADB och Juridik |
Bastugatan 7C
S-117 20 STOCKHOLM - Sweden
7.23.2 From RI to Raettsdata
In 1966, the Ministry of Justice made a survey of the possibilities
offered by computer technology. The survey covered the whole field of
authority for the Ministry of Justice, including police, public
prosecutors, prison administration, courts and the ministry itself.
The results were outlines in a brief of 1 December 1966, and at the
end of the same month (30 December 1966) a national coordination
council was established (Samarbetsorganet foer ADB inom
raettsvaesendet, Freese/Skoog/Tael 1972:11) later renamed SARI
(Samarbetsorganet foer raettsvaesendets informationssystem) or the
Joint Committee on Information Systems in the Judicial Field. The
chairman is the undersecretary of state of the Ministry of Justice.
Ministry of Justice
Fack
S-103 10 STOCKHOLM - Sweden
This council has coordinated the developments of computerized area
within the field indicated above. A number of projects were initiated
within the police and prison administrations - projects which the
coordination council regarded as jigsaw pieces of a larger puzzle
(Trotzig 1971). The emerging national justice information system was
named Raettsvaesendets informationssystem (RI), and was structured in
a number of stages. One such stage was the development of a
computerized retrieval system for legislation and case law. This stage
became known as LAGRI.
In 1981, the system was in principle made accessible for the public
at large, and regulatory law (1980:628 Raettsdatafoerordningen)
governs this situation.
[Page 431 ]
The LAGRI system was planned as a cooperative effort of several
institutions within the central government. The Swedish tradition is
to have relatively independent directorates, and these were given the
direct responsibility of establishing systems for their own areas.
This corresponds to a system established by law in Sweden, where the
directorates and agencies have the responsibility of publishing and
maintaining a compilation of its own statutes and regulations. Alpsten
(1982:49) also emphasize the old Swedish principle of public access to
governmental files (which has been a basic principle in Swedish
government since the 18th century), a principle which requires that
the public authorities keep track of their documents and encourage
them to maintain efficient information systems.
This background has had several effects. It made the institutions
very cost conscious, as the systems were constructed out of their own
budgets. It also made the character of a jigsaw puzzle even more
predominant - though despite excellent coordination, there has been no
joint administration of the LAGRI system. The information systems used
the same computer facility, the same retrieval program, and adhered to
a common set of guidelines adopted by the coordination council. But
priorities were set for development, scope of documentation etc by the
independent directorates and other agencies.
The agencies cooperating within Raettsdata are currently (Seipel
1982:80) National Board of Court Administration (Domstolverket), the
National Board of Customs (Generaltullstyrelsen), the Ministry of
Justice (Justitiedepartementet), the prison administration
(Kriminalv&rdsstyrelsen), and the National Tax Board
(Riksskatteverket). The data base is organized according to the same
scheme.
It should be mentioned that the Swedish parliament participates
also on a trial basis with a parliamentary data base within LAGRI (cfr
Alpsten 1978).
The combined files of acts and decrees specify all those in force
(4.000), approximately 50 per cent in authentic form.
The National Board of Court Administration has
[Page 432 ]
included case law in authentic form from the supreme court, the
courts of appeal, the supreme administrative court, the administrative
courts of appeal, the labour court, the rent court, and the appeal
council of the legal aid administration.
The National Board of Customs administration has included an index
to its statutes and regulations and provisions in authentic form.
The Ministry of Justice has included an index of governmental
committees with their terms of reference, an index of acts and
governmental decrees in force published in the official gazette
(Sveriges foerfattningssamling) and the authentic text to such
instruments in force and an index to treaties in force. The
conventions of the Council of Europe are available in English.
The prison administration has included an index of its statutes,
regulation and internal rules.
The National Tax Board has included an index of its statutes and
regulations, provisions in authentic form, and a selection of its
decisions.
The emphasis was therefore from the very start placed on the user
and on the administration of Justice. The practical view of the LAGRI
system was refreshing. Not only the performance of the system in terms
of retrieval efficiency was considered important, but also the
feasability of the system in economic terms and in its organizational
impact.
In this way, the LAGRI system emerged as a down-toearth system,
without the extragavances of spectacular retrieval strategies, but
with solid and practical results which could be defended on a
cost-benefit basis. This practical character is partly due to the
influence of the head of the Planning and Budget Secretariat of the
Ministry of Justice, Boerje Alpsten, who has been the chief architect
of the system.
The system is operated by contract with a public computer center,
DAFA (Datamaskincentralen foer administrativ databehandling) in
Stockholm.
[Page 433 ]
Box 34101
S-100 26 STOCKHOLM - Sweden
In the early years of LAGRI, tests were made in information
retrieval using the IBM system DPS. This was not found satisfactory,
mainly due to a lack of online features. A switch was made to the text
retrieval system IMDOC.
IMDOC is developed by the Swedish company Industri-Matematik, and
is available in several versions (like Documaster), including a mini
computer version known as Factfinder. It has achieved some
international penetration. It is a reliable, though simple, text
retrieval system based on a quite straightforward Boolean search
language, and with simple browsing techniques (including a KWIC-format
for focusing on search terms or auxilliary terms within retrieved
documents). The main attraction of IMODC is its efficiency in term of
computer resources for storage and updating. The overhead (extra data
gererated by search files etc in addition to the data in the original
text files) is reported to be as small as 0.3 - 0.4. Cfr Alpsten 1975
and Leimdoerfer 1973.
A comparative discussion of IMDOC and the Norwegian NOVA*STATUS is
given by Erikstad 1979. He states for instance that the disk space
needed for NOVA*STATUS files are 50 per cent larger than needed for
IMDOC's, mainly caused by the more complicated file structure of
NOVA*STATUS.
The Ministry of Justice did set out with a simple version
of IMDOC, which had only the Boolean and function, in addition
to several other limitations. These did not seriously hamper the
users, as most of them conducted extremely simple searches. This may,
perhaps, indicate that some search languages are unneccessary
sophisticated. The Ministry did, however, acquire a more advanced
version of IMDOC with a full range of Boolean operators.
It has become known (autumn 1983) that DAFA considers a replacement
of IMODC, but a final choice of a new retrieval software has yet to be
made.
One of the more interesting uses of the system is
[Page 434 ]
made by the administrative courts (Kammarraetterna and
Regeringsraetten). Here the system is employed for a double purpose.
Primarily it is used to keep track of registered cases. A brief
characteristic of the case is recorded when the case is filed in
court, along with a number of standard data, like the names of the
parties, journal numbers etc. (The form is reprinted in
Samarbetsorganet 1972 Bil 1.) This creates a computerized journal
which in one sense is shared between all courts, though located in
different towns. This facilitates the coordination of the cases both
in regard to procedures (two cases entered in respect of one person at
two different courts may easily be merged), and with respect to
substantive law (the court will try to avoid taking different views
upon similar cases pending before different courts).
The system has also facilitated the interface between the public
and the courts, who in their inquiries to the courts often do not have
a journal number or knowledge of other official identifiers. The story
is told of the postcard which was completely illegible except for the
postmark and the first name of the inquirer. This was sufficient to
identify the correct case.
The documents of the IMDOC system do have defined fields
- like for instance the date of the decision. This usually presumes
that the text retrieval system is also able to identify fields in a
document. Such structure is, however, lacking in IMDOC. The difficulty
is solved in the document design by adding prefixes to the data, and
through the prefix provide a definition of the subsequent string of
characters. Date is, for instance, defined by the prefix "A:", and the
search request
A:1.1.1969
will only retrieve documents decided on that day,
and consequently having that date. A list of some of the most common
prefixes is given by Seipel 1982:90.
The journal file, with the brief summary of a case, may also be
used as a precedent file. It is, however, only for administrative use,
and not part of the
[Page 435 ]
public Raettsdata system. It is a busy system, currently
processesing 20. - 50.000 search requests monthly (Alpsten 1982:52).
But in addition to the journal system, a special precedent system
has been established. Decisions of interest are stored in authentic
text, as they are prepared by the court for inclusion in the annual
case reports.
This demonstrates how the precedent system is locked into a
greater, total system as an integrated part. The cases are first word
processed (several solutions are used locally for word processing).
Care has been taken to maintain compatibility in the system, and the
decisions - when authorized - are channeled into the IMDOC data base.
The same text is then used when producing the case reports in printed
form. The printing is done by a commercial firm without extensive
editing or the inserting of typographical codes. The integrated system
for word processing, retrieval and printing, was an early example of
an integrated legal information system - and the elegance of the
solution should be appreciated.
Still one may disagree with some of the choices made. In
order to obtain sufficient data for the printing process, some simple
codes defining formats have been inserted into the text. These are
also displayed on the terminal, thereby providing some puzzlement to
the user.
This early achievment was, of course, facilitated by the
comparatively small amount of documents channeled into the system, and
by the coordination through the national council.
The case reports from the administrative courts were used
as a data base in a controlled experiment in text retrieval conducted
in 1974 by the Norwegian Research Center for Computers and Law in
cooperation with the Swedish Ministry of Justice, Bing/Harvold 1974,
including a description of the system IMDOC.
As mentioned, the LAGRI part of the system was made accessible to
the public at large in 1980. DAFA is given the authority on behalf of
itself and the relevant authorities to make contracts for terminal
[Page 436 ]
access. For the access, a tariff based on connect time is used
for dial-up terminals, and a tariff based on transactions is used for
terminals connected by leased lines. The tariff structure is reported
to be under reassessment.
As Raettsdata make personal data available through a
computerized system, it is subject to license from the Swedish Data
Inspectorate. This license requires that DAFA by contract shall seek
to prohibit the user from employing names for search requests - in
this way strengthening the data protection of those persons mentioned
in the decisions, which mainly will be judges, lawyers and witnesses.
In 1982, Alpsten (1982:52) reports that there are some 200
terminals connected to the system, of which about 100 terminals are
for outside users. About 5.000 search requests are processed monthly,
and of these 4.000 relates to the Ministry of Justice data base and
the precedents of the administrative courts.
As part of the deliberations leading to the public Raettsdata
system, a user survey was conducted in 1979. The results did show, for
instance, a surprisingly tendency to very simple search requests on
behalf of the user, though it may be doubtful whether this is a
reflection of user needs or a reflection of built in characteristics
in the IMDOC system.
A further study was carried out by the Swedish Law and Informatics
Research Institute (Gredborn 1982) based on interviews and statistical
data from the system. The conclusions are somewhat critical, pointing
out that there is a lack of training (as in respect of so many current
systems), and that the patchy coverage is not found satisfactory by
the users.
The analysis of statistics is quite interesting, as the RI system
has reported an overwhelming number of search requests containing only
one or two search terms - in the tables of Gredborn 73 per cent with
one search term and an additional 14 per cent with 14 search terms.
Only 3 per cent of the search requests combine more than 4 search
terms. The statistics do not specify the operators used. This is by
Gredborn related to the use of retrieval in journals and of simple
checks (1982:54). Another possibility may be
[Page 437 ]
that the design of IMDOC user interface does not encourage
complex requests.
In a follow up study by the Swedish Law and Informatics Research
Institute, the current statistics and its use is discussed
(Andersson/Loefgren 1982). The conclusions are mainly an affirmation
of Greborn's, and it is emphazised that the two quite different user
situations of the system do create difficulties. Andersson/Loefgren
1982:31 maintains that the assessment of the Swedish system has been
too much focussed on costs and system performance, and too little on
user environments. A third study by the Swedish Law and Informatics
Research Institute was released in 1983 (Wahlgren 1983).
It may be queried whether the administrative model adopted when the
information system was reserved for the public administration is still
appropriate when it has actually graduated to an open, national
systems. Its nature of a jigsaw puzzle is evident to its users, and
the data base structure - self evident from the authorities' point of
view - do not correspond to the typical fields of interests of the
users. As priorities have been set by the authorities on the basis of
their budgets, some areas of law of importance to the private
practising lawyer have been given little attention.
SARI launched a study of the new situation, and has drawn up some
guidelines for the future work (cfr Alpsten 1983:9-12). In these
guidelines is stressed the responsibility of the government to make
available information of "legal enactments and legislative histories
of different kinds", and it is pointed out that in the future design
of computerized legal systems one
"... should devote particular attention ... to the
interest of the general public in access to information".
These principles are applied also to governmental publishing of
case law, but not in respect to legal literature.
As for the administration of the system, it was decided that the
decentralized scheme should be retained, though the need for
"coordination and collaboration
[Page 438 ]
between different authorities and disparate sub-systems" was
emphasized. The participation of professional bodies - for instance
the bar association - was not mentioned in this context. But SARI
still has not completed its deliberations on the future of Raettsdata.
Sweden has also taken the initiative to a Nordic
cooperation in respect to legal information services. These meetings
are organized by the Ministries of Justice at irregular intervals in
the different Nordic countries, the last - JUSTIS-DATA '84 - was in
Oslo March 1984.
[Page 439 ]
7.24 Switzerland
Switzerland has not yet established a computerized legal
information service. It has, however, earned itself a place in the
development of such systems through the initiative by the company
Data+Plus, which in the early 1970ies developed a vector-based text
retrieval system, CONTEXT 70, which was used for some experiments in
legal information retrieval. The system is briefly mentioned above at
sect 4.8.
Currently (autumn 1983) there are plans for systems in the major
regions of Switzerland, and cooperation on a nation level seems to be
emerging.
An interesting development is the SIBIL system, a computerized
bibliographical retrieval system for legal literature. The system was
adopted in 1971 by the cantonal and university library of Lausanne.
This system has now been adopted by several other libraries.
The law faculty of the University of Geneva and Swiss Institute of
Comparative Law are using the system using an integrated data base.
The public and university library of Geneva, as well as the library of
the Federal Court will follow suit. Plans for extention to Fribourg
and Neuchatel are put forward.
Several other libraries have adopted the system, but have not
integrated their data bases. In the Canton of St Gallen, there is a
local network including the National Library of Lichtenstein. The
University of Basle is using SIBIL, and several foreign libraries
including the Ecole Polytechnique in Paris and the University of
Montpellier.
The libraries using SIBIL have organized themselves into a network
known as REBUS. Within this structure, microfiche catalogues are
updated and produced every three months using COM techniques. On-line
access is generally reserved for the staff. It is hoped to interlink
the different system by telecommunication in the near future - already
some of the libraries are linked and may search foreign data bases.
[Page 440 ]
7.25 United Kingdom
7.25.1 Introduction
The United Kingdom is an extremely interesting jurisdiction. It has
a long tradition - starting with the Oxford Experiments of Colin
Tapper, and including the development of the machine independent text
retrieval system STATUS by Bryan Niblett and Norman Nunn-Price. It has
several prominent researchers, and an interesting organizational
structure. But the first operative computerized information systems
were not launched until the end of the 1970ies.
There were earlier attempts. Most prominent among these may have
been TAXDATA, promoted by Henry Stone, an accountant. The system was
to operate under STATUS II, and was supported by several
administrations. However, the system never became operational
(Technical Report II 1978:73).
(1) The STATUS project
One would have expected that Britain, through the early Oxford
experiments of Colin Tapper (cfr above at sect 5.4.2 and 6.3.3), would
pioneer the field of legal information systems in Europe. But this was
not so. The first project of any scope was not launched until 1968-69,
and then by an unlikely sponsor, the United Kingdom Atomic Energy
Authority. This was due to the personal initiative of Bryan Niblett, a
barrister and scientist (employed at that time by Culham Laboratories.
He was fascinated by the possibilities offered by the computer (see
his early paper "The Computerization of the Statute Book", 1968), and
together with Norman Nunn-Price he created the first version of a text
retrieval system, STATUS (STATUte Search) running om Culham
Laboratories' KDF9 computer (see Niblett/Price 1969). This was a batch
version, the first interactive version was implemented in 1970.
[Page 441 ]
Today, STATUS is one of the more well-known machine indepentent
text retrieval programs. But initially the project had as its
objective to make the atomic energy legislation retrievable by a
computer program. This service never became essential, but the program
itself became important.
Today, STATUS is the property of the Atomic Energy Research
Establishment at Harwell, and is still being developed and maintained.
It was perhaps the first example of a machine independent program
(written in FORTRAN), which made the program more portable than other
systems. It has been implemented on many different computers including
IBM, Digital Equipment, ICL, Honeywell Bull. The STATUS I program was
purchased by the Norwegian government for use within the public
administration and developed in Norway into the program NOVA*STATUS -
used for several applications, also for the legal information
retrieval service of LAWDATA. The Dutch legal publisher Kluwer has
based its legal information service on the program. And, of course,
the British service EUROLEX bases its service on STATUS.
The original data base of STATUS was the Acts of Parliament and
associated delegated legislation dealing with atomic energy - 770
documents of altogether 140.000 words (cfr Niblett/Price 1970:290).
This was, of course, a too small volume on which to assess adequately
the performance of the system. Additional material was made available
by a legal publisher (Butterworth): 350.000 words of tax statutory
law, including the full text of the Income and Corporation Taxes Act
of 1970.
The first users of the STATUS program for retrieval purposes were,
however, not British lawyers, but the Council of Europe (cfr above at
sect 7.1.3). To gain insight into the possibilities of text retrieval
systems, the European Treaty Series of the Council was converted into
a data base at Harwell. The authentic text of both the English and
French versions were entered into the system, each set containing 73
documents of approximately 200.000 words - see Price/Bye/Niblett 1974.
A user experiment was also made with STATUS, the data base being
made available to Members of Parliament through terminals. However,
the first British
[Page 442 ]
services turned out not to be lawyers, but the Chemical Emergency
Service and Safety in Mines Research Establishment.
It is interesting to notice that in the United Kingdom, the
development started with the tool rather than with the service. STATUS
may be a general text retrieval system, but it was developed within a
legal context for legal uses. It was a pioneering system, conceived as
a machine independent text retrieval program rather than as an ad-hoc
solution for the maintenance of a specific service. In this way, the
development within the United Kingdom started in a way different from
that of many other countries - where the motivation was to get some
sort of computerized legal information service, and where the programs
were designed ad-hoc and with little or no consideration in respect of
portability.
We think this observation may explain the frustration felt by
British lawyers when no service emerged - the tool was available, but
it was not put into use.
(2) The Society for Computers and Law
Some of this frustration lay behind the establishment of the
Scottish Legal Computer Research Trust, founded in January 1970 by
solicitors in Edinburgh and Glasgow - later academic lawyers and
advocates joined. The major achievment of the Trust was the report
Computers for Lawyers by William Aitken, Colin Campbell, and
Richard Morgan (who had earlier worked with Stephen Skelley in
Manitoba, Canada). The report drew several conclusions on how a
computerized system might best be introduced in Scotland, cfr
Aitken/Campbel/Morgan 1972:135-1365. The conclusions were of a general
interest, as they were based on an analysis of the legal information
system and the needs of the users in a rather small jurisdiction.
One of the conclusions was that an organization corresponding to
the Trust ought to be established for the whole of the United Kingdom.
On 11 December 1973 the Society for Computers and Law was founded.
In a statement issued by the Society, it declared that it
[Page 443 ]
"... will try and monitor, where possible, the
development of the use of computers for legal purposes and avoid
haphazard development and proliferation of conflicting systems of
information storage and retrieval, and other uses of computers for
lawyers."
| Adress: | | The
Society for Computers and Law |
Administrative Secretary
11 High Street, Milton
Nr ABINGDON
Oxon OX14 4ER - United Kingdom
Since the summer of 1974 the Society has published a newsletter,
which by now has grown into a journal, titled Computers and
Law, and which is perhaps the only journal mainly concerned with
legal information retrieval and office automation for lawyers.
The Society has become an important factor in the British
development through its diversified activities. It has, starting in
1974 organized a biennial conference mainly oriented towards British
lawyers, but attracting an international audience as well.
| 1974 | | Oxford
"Systems designed to help lawyers" |
| 1976 | | Warwick
"Practical benefits of the computer for lawyers" |
| 1978 | | Edinburgh "Computers and Lawyers" |
| 1980 | | York
"Lawyers in the 80's" |
| 1982 | | Brighton
"Electronic Law '82" |
| 1984 | | Warwick
"Communications" |
Following the discussion at the 1978 conference in Edinburgh, where
plans for introducing LEXIS through Butterworths were announced with
some flourish, the Council of the Society established a working party.
Some months later this working party published an important report:
A National Law Library - The Way Ahead. Some of its
recommendations were acted upon, and the National Law Library was
created - in the dual organizations of The National Law Library Trust
and National Law Library.
The NLL was originally funded by professional bodies in England,
Wales and Northern Ireland, and after reviewing the work in 1981, this
funding has been maintained (Campbell 1983:21). The NLL has undertaken
[Page 444 ]
several activities. The user research carried out by Colin
Campbell and David Kidd (but regrettably never published in its
original form), has been carried on an extended. The concern for
documentation of sources from the smaller jurisdictions has been
channelled into the private services, leading to the Scots Law Times
being included in the EUROLEX data base, with a probable extention to
the revised statutes of Northern Ireland - and also with probable
similar development within LEXIS. NLL has been active creating
intermediary services. Such a service has been launched in Northern
Ireland, and it is suggested to establish a service in Chancery Lane,
London. NLL has also been active within the European Communities and
EURONET in forming the Committee on European Legal Intermediary
Services (CELIS). Technical studies have been launched, and the
successful development of the MicroBIRD text retrieval system for
microcomputers is one of the major successes of NLL.
Through its various facets, the United Kingdom Society of Computers
and Law and the National Law Library has created an effective
organization for the legal profession to meet the challenge of the
computerized systems: Both the legal information retrieval systems,
and equally important - though outside the scope of this book - the
automated law office.
(3) Universities and research institutions
No specialized academic or research institution for computers and
law has emerged in the United Kingdom, but there are noteworthy
activities going on at a number of universities and polytechnics.
The pioneers are still very much active. Colin Tapper, a
fellow of Magdalen College, is an All Souls Reader in Law at Oxford
University, and though his interests also embrace other fields, he
maintains an excellent text book on the substantive aspects of
computers and law, and takes a research interest in the legal
information retrieval services. As a director of Butterworth, he is
also involved in the venture with Mead Data Central and the marketing
of LEX-IS to British lawyers.
[Page 445 ]
OXFORD OX1 4AU - UK
Bryan Niblett was for a period Reader in Law and Computers
at the University of Kent at Cantebury, and is currently professor of
computer science at the University College, Swansea. He takes an
active part in the development of new methods and programs for text
retrieval, as well as in the substantive aspects of computers and law
- perhaps especially in the legal protection of computer programs.
| Adress: | | University College of Swansea |
Department of Computer Science
Sigleton Park
SWANSEA SA2 8PP - UK
Colin Campbell is currently a professor of jurisprudence at
Queen's University, Belfast, and his initiative and influence is
clearly felt in the developments both at the university and within the
jurisdiction of Nothern Ireland. Queen's was also the first university
to introduce computer application in law courses (cfr Technical Report
II 1978:71).
The Queen's University
BELFAST BT7 1NN - Northern Ireland
The Faculty of Law at the University of Southampton is the
institution which has taken the most direct responsibility for the new
field. A small group centered around Stephen Saxby and Richard
Swatton, and backed by the computer services of the university, has
initiated several projects. A maritime data base is under
establishment, documenting British case law. Currently (January 1984)
the data base has increased to 10 Mb, and a Maritime Bibliography
Database, covering journals, conferences and books has been started -
having currently 1.500 entries.
This will probably be mounted on the University's ICL computer
using the STATUS text retrieval programs. At the same time, the
University has started to develop courses and seminars in computers
and law. A one year course of Information Technology Law has recently
been approved for undergraduate law students in the final year.
[Page 446 ]
The enthusiasm of the prime movers seems to have made possiblea
team effort, and the activity may well develop into a permanent
program.
The University
SOUTHAMPTON S09 5NH - UK
At the Central Polytechnic of London, a "Legal Technology
Group" has been set up, headed by Andrew Trew. This group seems intent
on establishing some sort of bureau service, using several current
legal information services - at least EUROLEX and Infolex.
| Adress: | | Legal
Technology Group |
58, South Eaton Place
LONDON SW1W 9JJ - UK
At the School of Law of the Polytechnic of Newcastle upon
Tyne, Michael Heather has taken an active part in developing a
system for computer-aided instruction in law, as well as an
experimental data base, using the SPIRES general purpose information
retrieval program (which also permits text retrieval) available at the
Northumbrian Universities' Multiple Access Computer (NUMAC), cfr
Heather 1983.
| Adress: | | Faculty of Professional Studies |
Newcastle-upon-Tyne Polytechnic
Sutherland Building
Northumberland Road
NEWCASTE-UPON-TYNE NE1 8ST - UK
The Newcastle Electronic Law Library (NELLY) was first planned in
1979, when no legal information retrieval service was available. NELLY
currently includes English property law in authentic form (SPILAW);
the expert legal retrieval system LRS developed by Hafner using
conventional methods from the artificial intelligence research; the
American Bar Foundation Processor (developed by James Sprowl, cfr in
the section on the United States); and the analytical data base of
crime established by "Justice", the British section of the
International Organization of Jurists, to investigate the
decriminalization of those parts of English criminal law being of a
regulatory character.
In our context the SPILAW file may deserve the
[Page 447 ]
greatest interest, having been created especially as a teaching
environment for students, but containing the whole group of statutes
pertinent to property taken from the tapes of HMSO, complemented by
some selected case reports, totalling approximately 13 megabytes, cfr
Heather 1983:5. This would seem to be one of the very few text
retrieval environments created especially for law students.
At the Leicester Polytechnic, a forceful initiative has
recently been taken at the School of Law Resource Centre (LPSLRC).
An "Information and Consultancy Service" in "Computer Assisted
Instruction in Law" has been introduced, offering CAI programs in law,
in addition to several legal and general information retrieval systems
(among these LEXIS, EUROLEX and LAWTEL).
| Adress: | | School of Law - Resource Centre |
Leicester Polytechnic
LEICESTER LE1 9BH - UK
At Leicester Polytechnic Law School has also been founded a
Yearbook of Law and Information Technology under the general
editorship of processor C Arnold. The first issue is announced for the
summer of 1984.
At the University of Leicester a data base has been created
at the Scandinavian Labour Relations Data Center, containing statutory
material, law reports, journals and government documentation pertinent
to labour law and industrial relations in Scandinavian countries. Work
is undertaken to translate the original Scandinavian documents into
English (part of the data base has been published as Alan Neal and A
Victorin Law and the Weaker Party, vol III: Swedish Statutory
Material, Professional Books, Abingdon 1983). At present, however,
it does not seem that the Leicester data base is available through
text retrieval, Neal/Roberts 1983:8.
Sharman (1983:12) observes that most law shools seem to have
realized that computers and law is an important subject. He discusses
the syllabus of "Information and Communication Law" introduced at the
Polytechnic of Wolverhampton.
[Page 448 ]
(4) A note on unreported cases
To a large extent common law does, of course, rely on case law. The
doctrine of stare decisis does actually give case law the same
authority as statute law. Consequently, the information systems for
case law are important.
Such information systems have for a long time been the concern of
the legal profession. The authority of a case is, it would seem, not
dependent upon its publication. But from the reign of Edward I, there
were appointed some official court reporters who produced annual
volumes of reports. The system deoriented, however, and in the latter
part of the last century the existing publication schemes were heavily
critizised. WTS Daniel, whose initiative resulted in a reform,
complains that the reporting is
"... executed by many private and contemporary hands,
who, sometimes though in haste and inaccuracy, sometimes through
mistake and want of skill, have published very crude and imperfect
(perhaps contradictory) accounts of one and the same determination"
(Daniels 1883:6)
Supplementing the critizied reports, a barrister may act as an
amicus curiae to inform the judge of previous decisions upon
the subject of the case within his own knowledge. This is deemed
sufficient proof of the existence of a previous case, and the judge
may take that decision into account as a precedent when thought
appropriate.
In principle, a decision gains its authority when given by the
judge. But to be used in a later case, the decision either has to be
published in a case reporter, or presented by a barrister in court.
This would seem to have been the situation before the reform of 1865,
and seems still to be the situation.
The discussions of the need for a reform strikingly parallels our
present discussions within many jurisdictions. For instance the
obligation of the state to maintain an information system of the
necessary quality was pointed out, cfr for instance the report of the
Special Committee on Law Reporting of the Society for Promoting the
Amendment of the Law, which in
[Page 449 ]
section 5 of its 1853 report states (Daniels 1883:16):
"Judicial precedents are ... Judge-made laws ...;
and if it is the duty of the State to make the Law of the land
universally known, there can be no reason why the publication of the
Law declared from the Bench should be less formal and less complete
than that of the Law declared by the Legislature."
The reform of 1865 aimed at making a consolidated system for law
reporting, or - as The Spectator of 18.11.1865 puts it (cited
after Daniels 1883:289):
"The new scheme is the personification of one simple
idea, namely, that the machinery by which case-law is preserved ought
not to be the result or the creature of commercial enterprise, but
should be supplied and controlled by the Bar."
Cases to be reported, were to be carefully selected (Daniels
1883:143-144):
"... upon the principle of rejecting all cases which pass
without proper argument and discussion, or which are repetitions of
the principle of cases already reported, or which are otherwise
useless as precedents ..."
This ideology is the historical background of the present system of
case reporting in the United Kingdom. Since 1951 transcripts of the
shorthand notes of oral judgements has been preserved at the Royal
Courts of Justice (at first in the Bar Library, since 1978 in the
Supreme Courts library). Only a slight degree of selectivity seems to
have been exersised in the indexing and binding of these transcripts.
They were occasionally cited before the court, but the LEXIS service
of Butterworths does especially make it an objective to include what
is known as "unreported cases".
It would be surprising if such a change could take place without
the old discussion of selection and editing once more coming out into
the open.
In the Court of Appeal, the Master of the Rolls, sir John
Donaldson, stated that
[Page 450 ]
"...the profession was afflicted, or assisted, as the
case might be, by electronic data processing appliances, there was a
real risk that decisions in cases ... which decided no new law ...
would be solemnly recorded on the electronic data processing system,
with the result that future generations of High Court judges would be
bombarded with such decisions." Donaldson ruled that "discretion
should be exercised when citing computer recorded cases containing no
new law". (Stanly v International Harvester Co of Great Britain Ltd, 7
February 1983, The Times Law Report, London 1983).
In the House of Lords, Lord Diplock, supported by Lord Brightman,
discussed at some length the use of unreported cases with special
reference to LEXIS. He concludes his discussion (Robert Petroleum Ltd
v Kenny Ltd (1983) 2 AC 192) by this recommendation:
"My Lords, in my opinion, the time has come when your
Lordships should adopt the practice of deciding not to allow
transcripts of unreported judgements of the civil division of the
Court of Appeal to be cited upon the hearing of appeals to this House
unless leave is given to do so; and that such leave should only be
granted upon counsel giving an assurance that the transcript contains
a statement of some principle of law, relevant to an issue in the
appeal to this House, that is binding upon the Court of Appeal and of
which the substance, as distinct from the mere choice of phraseology,
is not to be found in any judgement of that court that has appeared in
one of the generalised or specialised series of reports."
Some commentators have pointed out that the crux of the matter is
whether the unreported case has any merit in deciding the problem at
hand, not in which way this case have been identified - by computer or
otherwise. Discussing the dynamics of the current situation, Bellord
(1982:62) comments:
"Modern technology makes the pronouncements of judges
ever cheaper to record and the computer offers the possibility of
preserving every judgement in aspic and ever more instantly
accessible. The traditional filter or digestive system is in
[Page 451 ]
danger of disappearing. A vast undigested mass of
material is likely to accumulate in these machines and this surely
raises questions over the whole concept of 'Precedent Law'... Food is
attractive to the hungry but it kills quite a few of the rich."
7.25.2 LEXIS
The first general computerized service to be offered English
lawyers was LEXIS. At the 1978 Edinburgh conference of the Society for
Computers and Law, the president of Mead Data Central announced its
cooperation with the major British legal publisher Butterworth.
The announcement caused a strong reaction - perhaps an intuitive
response to being served from the other side of the Atlantic, and
mixed with the disappointment of the work done through many years
without leading up to any British service.
Butterworth offered the new service through an affiliated company,
Butterworth Telepublishing.
| Adress: | | Butterworth (Telepublishing) Ltd |
4/5 Bell Yard
LONDON WC2A 2JR - UK
The LEXIS service is identical to the one described in respect of
the US original service. It is actually served out of the Miamisburg
computer facility of MDC near Dayton, Ohio (the route is actually
through leased lines to Mondial House, City of London; Goonhilly Down;
under the Atlantic Ocean to Beaver Harbour, Canada; onwards to
Montreal, Canada; Washington DC, USA and finally Miamisburg).
Consequently, the search language, the customized terminals and the
other features of the original LEX-IS service are also features of the
Butterworth Telepublishing service. The US data bases (and also the
French) of LEXIS is available for the user, if included in the
subscription.
Butterworth Telepublishing actually buys the service
[Page 452 ]
from Mead Data Central, and are quite free to stipulate the
economic conditions etc for which the service is made available to
British users.
The data base was initially quite large (100 million words), and is
currently divided into six British and European libraries.
ENGGEN - the English general library contains cases decided in the
superior courts of England and Wales since 1945, reported in one or
more of the following series: All England Law Reports, Building Law
Reports, Butterworths' Workmen's Compensation Cases, Criminal Appeal
Reports, Immigration Appeal Reports, Industrial Cases Reports,
Industrial Relations Law Reports, Industrial Tribunal Reports, Justice
of the Peace Reports, Knight's Industrial Reports, Law Journal
Reports, Law Reports (Appeal Cases, Queen's Bench, Chancery, Probate
and Family), Law Reports Restrictive Practises Cases, Law Times
Reports, Legal Decisions affecting Bankers, Lloyd's Reports, Local
Government Reports, Patent Cases, Property and Compensation Reports,
Road Traffic Reports, Simon's Tax Cases, Tax Cases (since 1875), Value
Added Tax Tribunal Reports, Weekly Law Reports. Included are also many
unreported cases since 1980, including all cases decided in the House
of Lords, the Court of Appeal (Civil Division), The Employment Appeal
Tribunal, the Commercial Court, the Patents Court and revenue appeals
in the Chancery Divison. In 1982, 4.286 unreported cases were
available. The sum of cases in this file exceeded (1982) 37.000.
The library also contains public general acts in force
(English legislation with nationwide effect). This data base was
completed in December 1983, comprising approximately 2.700 separate
Acts of Parliament and Ecclesiastical Measures, and more than 7.500
statutory instruments. The texts are edited and updated with an
updating response of 16 days. And, finally, the current finance bill
is available.
[Page 453 ]
UKTAX - the United Kingdom Tax Library, containing cases decided in
the superior courts of England and Wales, Scotland and Northern
Ireland since 1875 and report in the general series of law reports, in
Tax Cases (published by Her Majesty's Stationary Office) or (since
1972) in Simon's Tax Cases, and the VAT Tribunal Reports. The library
also contains all the current texts of relevant acts of parliament and
statutory instruments made under these. All current double tax
agreements of which UK is a member, are included. Press releases,
extra-statutory concessions, VAT leaflets and other documents are
included, as well as the current finance bill.
ENGIND - the English industrial library contains all the cases
decided in superior courts of England and Wales (including the
Employment Tribunal) since 1945 and reported in general series of law
reports as well as specialized series, supplemented by unreported
cases (cfr the list in ENGGEN). All current acts of parliament and
statutory instruments under these acts.
UKIP - the United Kingdom intellectual property library contains
all the cases decided in superior courts of England and Wales since
1945 reported in general series of law reports as well as specialized
series (cfr the list in ENGGEN), supplemented by unreported cases by
the Patents Court since 1980. In addition, it contains all current
acts of parliament and statutory instruments under these acts.
ENGLG - the English local government library contains all the cases
decided in superior courts of England and Wales since 1945, and are
reported in general series of law reports as well as specialized
series (cfr the list in ENGGEN and Ryde's Rating Cases). In addition,
it contains all current acts of parliament and statutory instruments
under these acts.
[Page 454 ]
EURCOM - the European Communities library contains all decisions of
the Court of Justice (since inception in 1954) as reported in European
Court Reports, including cases not yet published in the ECR or the
Common Market Law Reports. It also includes decisions by the EEC
Commission relating to competition law from 1972. Earlier decisions
(before UK joined the Communities) are translated for LEXIS and will
be included.
Plans are announced for inclusion of libraries of Scottish law and
"certain Commonwealth countries".
It is noteworthy that Butterworth has been able to establish a
statutory data base. This is rather in contrast with their US
counterpart, which has not been too active in respect of legislation.
Actually, the Butterworth statutory data base will be the only source
for an up-to-date fully edited version of the statutory text, as the
officially published statutes in force tend to become rapidly
outdated. As a conventional publisher, Butterworth has considerable
expertise in exactly this area. It would not be surprising if the
statutory data base, with its complete coverage, will be decisive for
the market acceptance of LEXIS.
Butterworth Telepublishing charges according to a slightly complex
scheme, which includes fixed and use charges. The fixed charge was
(1982) a subscription (including a customized terminal) of 250 pounds
a month, and a minimum usage entitlement charge (for less than 10
lawyers) of 100 pounds. The use charge includes a charge per hour
connect time starting at 55 pounds and decreasing to 30 pounds for
more than 30 hours monthly. In addition, there is a charge of 30 pence
per "search unit", a search unit being based on the total number of
occurrences of the words in each search request in the relevant file -
each 25.000 occurrences or fractions thereof is a "search unit". This
implies a minimum monthly charge (1982) exceeding 350 pounds,
excluding local telecommunication.
User groups have been established - one of them a special LEXIS
Educational Users' Group.
[Page 455 ]
7.25.3 EUROLEX
The European Law Centre Ltd has been publishing European law since
1962. Most of its publications were in English, and the form varied -
from, for instance, the abstracts in European Law Digest to the
authentic texts of cases, supplemented by headnotes, in the Common
Market Law Reports (cfr Worlock 1983:3). The ELC is actually part
of the international Thomson organization, which for a period also
owned The Times - and, consequently, the Times Law Reports.
In 1979, the development of a computerized service, EUROLEX, was
initiated with Norman Nunn-Price, one of the twin originators of the
STATUS system as data base director. A first and rather shallow data
base of Common Market Law Reports, Fleet Street Reports of Patent
Cases, and the Weekly Law Reports - followed by The Times Newspaper
Law Reports was made available to pilot users.
4 Bloomsbury Square
LONDON WC1A 2RL - UK
This experiment was employed to get user feedback, which again was
necessary for deciding the future policy of EUROLEX. The initial
experience did, for instance, indicate that more than primary sources
would be of interest to the users. Nunn-Price (1983:6) also maintains
that the use of case law is more shallow than commonly held, and that
a depth of 30 years is generally sufficient, though exceptions should
be made in respect to certain specialist fields.
The initial phase lasted 18 months. In 1981, Nunn-Price was joined
by David Worlock, who took charge of the organization. At that time
EUROLEX had 25 customers and a data base of 300 million characters. A
period of rapid expansion followed.
For retrieval, EUROLEX uses a computer bureau which maintains the
time-sharing service and supports the STATUS text retrieval program,
which is discussed above. It is reported (Nunn-Price 1983:14) that
EURO-LEX feedback is going into a major revision of the program - and
remembering that Nunn-Price himself was
[Page 456 ]
at one time intimately associated with the STATUS project, a
close cooperation should be expected.
In 1982, a major legal publisher, namely Sweet & Maxwell, made an
executive agreement of cooperation with EURQLEX. Many of Sweet &
Maxwell's journals were already documented by EUROLEX. The agreement
will facilitate the inclusion of secondary sources, of which EUROLEX
found a need through their use study.
The EUROLEX has built what Nunn-Price calls "a catholic database"
in order to respond to user needs, and this is still being rapidly
completed. The EUROLEX has had to develop techniques for creating data
bases. A lot of the material, especially the backlog, has to be
rekeyed. An increasing amount is, however, received in machine
readable form from printers. Their formats do, however, vary widely.
Therefore EUROLEX converts all material into their own standard,
intermediate form called EUROLANG, from which a program builds the
STATUS format. This activity is supported by the EUROLEX programs run
on a VAX 11/750 (Nunn-Price 1983:11).
The following libraries are available on EUROLEX:
| CAR: | | Criminal
Appeal Reports since 1970 and Criminal Appeal Reports (sentencing)
since inception in 1979. |
| CLY: | | the
Current Law Yearbooks since 1977. |
| CL80: | | Current
Law Monthly since 1980. Monthly updating. |
| CMLR: | | Common
Market Law Reports since 1962. Weekly update. |
| ECC: | | European
Commercial Cases since inception in 1978. Quarterly update. |
| EHRR: | | European Human Rights Reports since inception in 1979.
Quarterly update. |
| ELD: | | European
Law Digest since inception in 1973. Monthly update. |
| EPO: | | Official
Journal of the European Patent Office, English language texts -
unreported cases will be added. Monthly update. |
| ETS: | | Council
of Europe Treaties since establishment of the Council in 1949.
|
| EUROL: | | European Court Reports and Common Market Law Reports since
inception in 1962. |
| FSR: | | Fleet
Street Reports since its inception in 1963. Monthly update.
|
[Page 457 ]
| FTCLR: | | Financial Times Law Reports since the inception in 1981.
Three times weekly |
| IRLAW: | | Industrial Cases Reports since inception in 1972 including
the Reports of Restrictive Practices Cases since 1970. Monthly update.
|
| OJL: | | Official
Journal "L" Series (Legislation) since 1980, updated monthly (in 1981
391 issues of the journal were published). Sub-divided into annual
files. |
| RPC: | | Reports
of Patent Cases since 1945. Forthnightly update. |
| RTR: | | Road
Traffic Reports from inception in 1970. Monthly update. |
| SI: | | Published
Statutory Instruments since 1981 - updated as available from Her
Majesty's Stationary Office. |
| SIF: | | Statutes
in Force (Finance from 1890, Sale of Goods from 1893, Weight and
Measures from 1878, Local Government from 1867). |
| ScotLaw: | | Scots Law Times Case Law Reporting (33 years). Session
Cases and Criminal Cases (30 years), unreported decisions of the Inner
House (from 1982). Weekly update. |
| TLR: | | Times
Law Reports since 1976. Daily or weekly update. |
| TAXL: | | Official Tax Cases, Tax Leaflets and Annotated Tax Cases
(1950-75). |
| VATL: | | VAT
Tribunal Reports since inception in 1982. |
| WLR: | | Weekly
Law Reports since 1953 - the library is divided into WLR53 (1953-66)
and WLR67 (1967 to the present). |
In cooperation with the merchant banker Morgan Grenfell & Co, Ltd,
EUROLEX has also made available a structured tax law system called
Interfisc, containing summary description of the taxation systems of
more than 60 countries, comments, statutes on double taxation
treaties, rates of withholding tax on dividend, interest and
royalties, double taxation relief (EUROLEX Newscast 2/83:1).
In December 1983 EUROLEX introduced its NEWSLaw service, which is
the first in a series of on-line legal newsletters designed to keep
the practitioner up to date. The service is similar to that of its US
counterpart, WESTLAW. It went live on 1 January 1984 and will be
updated forthnightly (Ruoff 1984:12).
[Page 458 ]
In October 1983, EUROLEX announced that the Lord Chancellor's
Department had selected EUROLEX for making a new index of decisions in
criminal cases.
As LEXIS, EUROLEX has available statutes. The LEXIS data base
contains, however, the statutory texts as they are published by
Butterworth, that is consolidated and edited, while EUROLEX uses the
statutory texts as published by HMSO for Statutes in Force - which may
be a form somewhat less easy to use.
The tariff structure is quite simple and relative to connect time.
Currently (1983) EUROLEX has some 375 subscribers using the service
through dial-up terminals (Nunn-Price 1983:1).
The EUROLEX data base is strong in patent law and European
Community law (Nunn-Price 1983:8). Also, EUROLEX has met a point of
criticism by including a Scottish data base, the SCOTLaw. It has been
feared that the small British jurisdictions may not be sufficiently
tempting to a commercial venture for providing users with services
within that area. The SLT has, however, been a success. Later, the
ITELIS (Irish Times EUROLEX Legal Information Service) has been
introduced (Ruoff 1984:12).
EUROLEX has great concern for finding appropriate and user-friendly
structures for their data bases. Worlock (1983:5-10) sketches a
hierarchical structure from digests and current awareness material
down to the authentic text of the primary sources.
The European Law Centre, as its name implies, has an international
perspective on its publishing. One should also expect an international
dimension in its computerized services.
This is actually found in its agreement with the US system WESTLAW
to wholesale WESTLAW to their users. Since 1983, EUROLEX users may
access WESTLAW through EUROLEX, and have the full benefit of the US
data bases of WESTLAW. The price will be EUROLEX tariffs, and the
contract is a simple addendum to the original EUROLEX subscription.
Cooperation has also been established with the Australian Computer Law
Services.
[Page 459 ]
EUROLEX has declared its adherence to a gateway policy - bringing
foreign services in through national services as "gateways" (Worlock
1983:7-8).
It is also reported that the European Law Center has set up an
Information Desk, an answering or bureau service, which has available
several computerized services (CELEX, European Communities; ITALGIURE,
Italy; QL Systems, Canada; SYDONI, France; and WEST-LAW, US) and to
which requests may be made (EUROLEX Newscast 1-2/83).
In order to keep in touch with its users, EUROLEX has established
user groups, and at least one such English and one Scottish gropus are
working.
EUROLEX also cooperates with Europe-Data for the ELLIS project
(European Legal Literature Information Services), and with the
ITALGIURE organization for the creation of the Community data base of
environmental law, ENLEX.
EUROLEX also cooperates with experiments in bureau services, for
instance with the Legal Technology Group (see above), or Queen's
University in Belfast (see below).
The European Law Centre is a publisher, but EUROLEX did from the
start not only document this material - but supplementing this by
material from other publishers as well, most notably Sweet & Maxwell.
In this we see an interesting situation, as the two major British
legal publishers are providing computerized services through different
computerized systems - the EUROLEX and LEXIS. In this respect, the
British situation is clearly different from the US situation (where
the Mead Data Center originally was no publisher) offering competition
to both traditional and computerized services of the major publisher.
West. It may be said that in the UK, the competition still follows the
same front lines, but its intensity have escalated through the
computer systems.
[Page 460 ]
7.25.4 Prestel services
Britain is the home of the Prestel services, and it is no surprise
to find that special legal information services have been developed
for Prestel. In most countries, such services is a by-product of a
general legal information service - like DATEV and JURIS in Germany,
which make access through the national Bildschirmtext possible. In
Britain, at least two genuine teletex services have been launched.
(1) Infolex
Infolex was founded in 1977 by Stephen Castell, a consultant in
information technology, and Neil Maybury, a solicitor with a large,
commercial firm. Maybury started to develop an indexing structure in
which could be fitted notes on cases and articles, while Castell
organized a data base. Infolex Service Limited was founded in 1977,
and shortly afterwards became a Prestel information provider - having
(1982) some 1.400 frames at node 371.
| Adress: | | Infolex Services Ltd |
45 Brompton Road
LONDON SW3 1DE - UK
Infolex may be considered a current awareness service, which seeks
to provide the user with an overview of recent developments within
specified areas of law. This is especially provided by the data base
known by the acronym CLARUS (Case Law Report Updating Service). This
data base is structured in areas, which is again subdivided -
according to traditional, legal distinctions.
The area "familiy law" is, for instance, subdivided into
"adoption", "affiliation", "domestic proceedings and Magistrate Court
Act", "divorce", "domestic violence", "financial provision, "foreign
decree", "infants", and "property". "Infants" is further subdivided
into "general", "care", "custody", "guardianship", "wardship", and
"Children and Young Persons Act", cfr Castell 1982a:24. Such an index
tree has to be imposed on
[Page 461 ]
the material organized in Prestel also due to the design
of the system.
CLARUS covers major reporting sources like Weekly Law Reports, All
England Law Reports, Times Law Reports, Solicitors' Journal, Fleet
Street Law Reports, European Intellectual Property Review. Extention
to additional sources is being considered (New Law Journal, Estate
Gazette).
In addition, Infolex supports a statutory data base known by the
acronym STALUS (Statute Law Updating Service).
Of course, Infolex supports only the retrieval and relevance
functions of an information service. To satisfy the source function,
the user has to employ supplemental services, for instance a document
delivery service.
Subscription costs are 350 pounds (1982) annually, with several
introductory offers. To this is added the cost of using the system.
Infolex has demonstrated a gateway into the EUROLEX system (Castell
1982b) in 1980, and announced in 1982 what was called the "Infolex
Bureau" in cooperation with the Legal Technology Group at the
Polytechnic of Central London (Castell 1982a:25).
(2) Lawtel
Lawtel is an additional current awareness service available through
Prestel. Its documentation area is broader that that of Infolex, but
it is more recent - and the depth of the data base is more shallow.
Also, it has been maintained that the selection for inclusion is
rather restrictive (Castell 1982a:26).
PO Box 6
Douglas ISLE OF MAN - UK
For England and Wales, the Lawtel data base includes:
[Page 462 ]
Summaries of statutes since 1979; a cumulative statute
citator with a one day updating response; summaries of "significant"
statutory instruments; summaries of all provisions which have and have
not been brought into force since 1980; summaries of rules and
directions of practice and procedure since 1979; titles of "practical
articles" which have appeared in "recognized" law journals since 1979;
summaries of House of Lords' Decisions since 1979; summaries of
"significant" decisions of the courts and tribunals since 1979;
summaries of quantum damage awards in cases of death and personal
injury since 1978 for which authenticated reports have been obtained;
recent book titles; progress and summaries of government bills.
Lawtel also provides a printed index, and runs an around the clock
answering bureau which provides its answers on closed frames in the
system.
The document design is obviously of great importance in a system
like Lawtel, and design principles are briefly discussed by Samuels
(1982). Evidently, the retrieval function is not greatly influenced by
the summary, but rather by the indexing of each document. The summary
will mainly serve the relevance function. Samuels (1982:27) makes the
point:
"If the primary source is likely to be readily available
..., then the barest reference will probably suffice. But if the
primary source is not likely to be readily available ..., then the
need to extract and summarise much more information, almost
self-sufficient information, is obviously much greater."
This may be taken to mean that Lawtel aims at supporting the source
function for less available sources. Samuels does, however, probably
discuss only the relevance function, making the point that in respect
of readily available sources, one may in addition rely on another
information system as a "second stage relevance assessment", while
Lawtel has to be self-sufficient in respect of the relevance function
for those sources less available. Samuels (1982:26) points out that to
have the sources made available,
"... you must go to the traditional printed sources or
the screen services now available".
[Page 463 ]
The expansive Lawtel service is reported to have made an agreement
with Butterworth, coordinating the Lawtel service with Butterworth's
LEXIS service.
7.25.5 Northern Ireland - and the BIRD systems
In 1968 a project was initiated at the Queen's University, Belfast,
in cooperation between the Computer Centre and the Faculty of Law.
This project aimed at developing an off-line Case and Statute
Citator for Northern Ireland. Like other small jurisdictions, Northern
Ireland suffered from a lack of appropriate research tools for lawyers
- the last citator had been produced in 1953. It was hoped that the
project could provide such an index, and at the same time contribute
to a better understanding of the potential of computerized legal
information systems, cfr Aitken/Campbell/Morgan 1972:25.
The Citator was successfully completed in April 1970. The project
did, however, disclose several drawbacks in the system design - one of
the major being that a qualified lawyer had to examine the statutes
and underline the words to be indexed. As usual, it was suspected that
the indexer was not as consistent and thorough as desired. But the
main problem was the insufficent number of competent lawyers who would
agree to do the painstaking and boring work of manual indexing
(QUOBIRD 1974.)
In the Department of Computer Science and the Computer Centre, a
rather large research group on interactive computing had been set up.
Benefitting from this expertise, a basic design for a conversional
retrieval system was drawn up in mid-1968, the planning period being
extended to 1969, and a pilot system being implemented the following
five months.
Based on the experience gained through these activities, a first
interactive text retrieval system was designed and implemented, BIRD
1. This system was developed through 1970. Tests of the system on a
data base of 400.000 characters and mathematical simulations led to
modifications, and the final version was
[Page 464 ]
completed at the end of 1971 (Lancaster/Fayen 1973:102-103 for
examples of the dialog and a brief characterization).
BIRD 1 had primarily been designed as a research tool to study on-
line information systems. Changing the perspective to user needs led
to a different basic design: A system adapted to be easily mouldable
to meet the different needs of different user groups. The next system
- BIRD 2, or more commonly known as QUOBIRD - was developed from 1971
to 1974, and in later versions its performance was enhanced. The
system became available on a commercial basis marketed by ICL.
It was estimated that this version of QUOBIRD had
required approximately 30 man years of research and development over a
period of 6 calendar years. The resulting product was a high standard
text retrieval system, written in FORTRAN and highly portable. The
search language included Boolean operators, synonym functions,
right-hand truncation, saving of search requests, etc - see QUOBIRD
1974 and QUIS 1974:33.38.
The work at Queen's continued after the first QUOBIRD system into a
second version, diversifying into word processing as well. The more
recent system of this family is known as QUILL - Queen's University
Information Retrieval from Legal Literature. The link to the legal
applications is indicated by its acronym, but the system itself is
general, designed to store, edit and retrieve documents. The search
language is still Boolean with distance operators and saving of search
requests, possibilities for constructing macro commands, synonym
groups and a "thesaurus of comments" within an index. Still the
emphasis of the design is - perhaps - on file structures and internal
efficiency (Devine/Smith 1980).
There have been reports on some cooperation between the BIRD and
STATUS projects (cfr Technical Report II 1978:73), but details are not
known.
The Queen's programs have been basic to the development of the
MicroBIRD program for inhouse text retrieval on a microcomputer,
sponsored by the National Law Library, see above.
[Page 465 ]
These retrieval systems are the result of a research project
closely associated with legal information retrieval - though itself
not part of any operative legal information service. Legal documents
were, however, part of its text data base (Northern Ireland
Constitution Acts, and Westminster Statutes in Force).
Professor Colin Campbell, one of the authors of the Scottish report
(cfr above), is currently a professor of jurisprudence at Queen's.
There has been active cooperation in Northern Ireland between the law
faculty and the computer science department, and it is interesting to
note that this development parallels that of United Kingdom as a
whole: The start is made in designing the retrieval system - in the
tool. But the follow up, the legal documents necessary to use the tool
and launch an information service, is being produced at a slower rate.
For the Northern Irish lawyers, LEXIS and EUROLEX are not as useful
as for their English colleagues - as sources from their jurisdiction
is not documented. A mid-user service has, however, been launched
using EUROLEX at the Queen's University, helped by professor Campbell
and the National Law Library (Hewitt 1982:40).
[Page 466 ]
7.26 United States of America
7.26.1 Introduction
The United States of America is a big country and a complex
country. It is impossible to give a complete review of all the
relevant activities on a national and state level. The history of
computerized legal information retrieval is, to a large extent, also
the history of its emergence in the US.
The development is nearly exclusively associated with the big
systems within the private and public sectors. It is, for instance,
surprising that there is no academic institution researching legal
information systems or their use. It is perhaps also not unfair to
maintain that the legal profession is not overly concerned with the
policy underlying the development of legal information services. In a
diversified country like the US, one may perhaps trust market
mechanisms, but such an attitude is contrasted with the public
involvement and general concern found in many other countries - for
instance across the border in Canada.
At the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, professor
Layman Allen is still working with legislative language, logic and law
- an activity which continues to have a general impact on the field.
University of Michigan
ANN ARBOR
Michigan 48104 - USA
At Rutgers University, New York, L Thorne McCarty is
currently professor of computers and law. His TAXMAN project is within
the field of artificial intelligence and law, but he is also taking a
strong interest in the possible application of AI-techniques in
information retrieval.
[Page 467 ]
| Adress: | | Rutgers University |
Department of Computer Science
Hill Center for the Mathematical Sciences
Busch Campus
NEW BRUNSWICK
New Jersey 08903 - USA
At Southern University School of Law, Baton Rouge,
Louisiana professor Gary deBessonet is working on AI-applications, and
there may emerge an institution from this activity.
The Arizona State University has actually established The
Arizona Law & Technology Institute (ALTI), which organized its first
successful conference on computers and law in 1982.
| Adress: | | Arizona Law & Technology Institute |
The Law Society
Arizona State University
College of Law
TEMPE
Arizona 85287, USA
It should, however, also be mentioned that the American
Bar Foundation, Chicago, where James Sprowl - as a research attorney -
has made considerable contributions to the field of computers and law.
Especially interesting is his ABF Processor, an advanced word
processing system incorporating elements from AI-research and results
of Layman Allen's work on legislative language.
| Adress: | | American Bar Foundation |
1155, East Sixtieth Street
CHICAGO
Illinois 60637 - USA
In the historical section (above at chapter 6), has been
mentioned the three older journals which also report on developments
in legal information systems.
Law/Technology (formerly Law and Computer
Technology is published by
[Page 468 ]
| Adress: | | World
Association of Lawyers of the World Peace Through Law Center
|
Section on Law/Technology
Suite 800
1000 Connecticut Avenue NW
WASHINGTON DC 20036 - USA
Jurimetrics Journal (formerly Modern Uses of
Logic in Law - MULL) is published by
| Adress: | | American Bar Association |
1155 East 60th Street
CHICAGO
Illinois 60637 - USA
Rutgers Computer and Technology Law Journal
(formerly Rutgers Journal of Computers and Law) is published by
| Adress: | | Rutgers Law School |
180 University Avenue
NEWARK
New Jersey 07102 - USA
An interesting addition (1978) is the Law/Computer
Journal The L/CJ publishes topical issues, and does from time to
time discuss legal information systems.
| Adress: | | Law/Computer Center |
PO Box 54308 Terminal Annex
LOS ANGELES
California 90054 - USA
The editor for the Computer/Law Journal, Michael D
Scott, is also involved with the Law & Technology Press, which
publishes at least two specialized newsletters. One of them (started
in 1982) The Scott Report, is of quite general nature.
| Adress: | | Law
and Technology Press |
PO Box 4658 Terminal Annex
LOS ANGELES
California 90051 - USA
There actually exist a number of newsletters on the US
market within the area of computers and law (covering such subjects as
software law, tax
[Page 469 ]
law, data protection, freedom of information, computer
crime, etc), but none specializing in legal information retrieval.
After the termination of Callaghans Computer Law Service, there
is no general state-of-the-art work being continually updated.
There exists also a Computer Law Association, Inc but
this organization is mainly concerned with substantive law issues.
This book is limited to legal information systems oriented towards
the lawyer as an end user - we do not in general discuss neither
legislative, library systems or criminal justice systems. Obviously
there are a great number of such systems in the US, closely related to
our main subject - and it is often difficult to draw or justify a
line.
One of the recent and ambitious projects is related to
the US Patent Office. In the patent division alone, 24 million
documents are on file, and the trademark division has 460.000 active
marks. A four years plan has been launched to convert this huge amount
of documents into computerized form by rekeying it using IBM word
processor. 300 extra staff has been brought in to assist in this
project. The possibility of networking this system with patent offices
in Europe and Japan has been mentioned.
There is a profusion of legislative systems on a state level - a
review and a discussion of a few is found in Eres 1980:1-126. One such
system will, however, be mentioned briefly - the system of the Law
Revision Council in the House of Representatives. This office is
responsible for the consolidation work known as the US Code, where
statutes are organized under 50 titles. The consolidating work started
early in this century, but has never been completed. In 1975, a Law
Revision Counsel was established in order to give continuity to the
process.
The Councel desires to publish a consolidated version of
the US Codes each 6th year. The publication has 15 volumes, and is
published in cooperation with West Publishing Company. The
1976-edition was for the first time produced aided by computerized
methods.
[Page 470 ]
In order to facilitate the quality of the editorial work,
the Counsel established an information system based on the House
Information System. This contains not only the authentic text of the
statutes, but also the valuable notes and annotations. FLITE (cfr
below), which also documents statutes, had a data base 3 years out of
date - but has been brought up to date through the Counsel. From
FLITE, the statutes are channeled into the Department of Justice's
JURIS system - which is also available at the Congress.
The software used for this system is the IBM text
retrieval system STAIRS - one of the few applications of STAIRS to a
major legal information system in the US - though there are several
such applications elsewhere (PRODASEN, DATEV, CEDIJ, Camera dei
deputati, and DC-jura).
Our interest in the system is simply that it generates the
computerized versions of statutes which at later stages are piped into
the major legal information retrieval systems FLITE and JURIS, and
cooperates with West, which is marketing one of the two major private
services, WESTLAW. The US systems therefore seem quite dependant upon
this system, which for the most part is operating behind the scenes of
the legal arena.
Also the Library of Congress, Congressional Research Service
should be mentioned. For one thing, CRS is directed by Robert
Chartrand, who in the beginning of the 1960ies was developing the LITE
service for the US Air Force (see below), working with the founder of
legal computerized retrieval, professor John Horty.
One of the sections of CRS is responsible for legal
information to the Congress - about 50 lawyers handling some 300.000
requests annually (1980). Originally, CRS wanted to automatize the
production of the conventional "Digest of Public General Bills and
Requests", and started out using standard IBM software. To develop a
specialized system, Mead Data Centra (cfr below on LEX-IS) was
contracted, but this did not result in any new system. CRS developed
on its own the system SCORPIO (based on the RECON system, also basic
to JURIS, see below).
[Page 471 ]
SCORPIO is a rather cumbersome information retrieval
system, designed for the special purposes of the CRS, for instance for
the production of "back-of-the-book" indexes to printed volumes. The
system feeds the LEGIS system of the House of Representatives (which
is another STAIRS-based system). The CRS utilizes both FLITE and JURIS
(but not the system of the Law Revison Counsel).
Our interest in mentioning the CRS and the SCORPIO system, is
mainly to emphasize that the organizational problems of legal
information systems presumes some sort of coordination between
legislative and library systems, and the systems aimed at the end
user, both in the private and public sectors. Though not detailed in
our discussion below, there are a number of important activities
taking place in the US legal system - and these activities must, of
course, be taken into consideration in an appropriate assessment of
the US situation and systems. On the other hand, there are
difficulties in getting a clear bird's eye view of the complex
situation - and it would not be unjust, we think, to maintain that
this to some extent is due to an unnecessary lack of coordination.
This observation also leads us to believe that the situation is not
stable, and will lead to future activity and development.
The two major US commercial systems are, as will be
discussed in detail below, the LEXIS and WESTLASW systems. In the
early days of the competition, some comparative studies were made
(Sprowl 1976, Greguras/Carlile 1979). This occurred at a time when
WESTLAW documented only headnotes, while LEXIS offered the authentic
form of the sources. Obviously, they are presently unvalid for a
comperative analysis, as the WESTLAW service has changed its policy
with respect to document design.
It is reported that both WESTLAW and LEXIS are included
in a recent survey by the US research organization DATAPRO of 24
computerized information services. In this survey WESTLAW is ranked
before LEXIS, but no details of the survey are available (February
1984).
[Page 472 ]
7.26.2 From LITE to FLITE
Perhaps the most important project sired by professor Horty and the
Aspen Corporation (cfr above at sect 6.3.1-2) is the LITE system.
As early as 1961, the Office of the Staff Judge Advocate at the Air
Force Accounting and Finance Center began to look into the
possibilities of using computerized retrieval systems. In August 1962
a proposal was made to the Headquarters of the US Air Force,
recommending the conversion from manual to computerized research. The
Judge Advocate General also recommended that such a system should be
based on authentic texts. The proposal was approved, and the Office of
the Staff Judge Advocate, Air Force Accounting and Finance Center, was
given the responsibility for the development and testing of the LITE
system (Air Force Letter No 177-6, 13 November 1963).
5155 East 39th Avenue
DENVER
Colorado 80207 - USA
The name of the system - LITE - was an acronym for Legal
Information Thru Electronics; and the system was of course launched
under the tempting slogan Let there be LITE!
Originally the data base of the LITE system consisted of statutes
and regulations supplemented with some case law. During the years of
operation, additional material has been made available, and today the
data base is fed through an agreement with the office at the Congress
working on the United States Code.
Around 1970 the LITE data base was probably the largest collection
of machine readable legal sources in existence (Tapper 1970:26).
Later, however, other systems have eclipsed LITE in this respect. In
1974 the total data base comprised some 106.600.000 text words.
LITE was launched from the pad prepared by Aspen, but has been
modified during its years of operation. The search strategies are,
however, still based on Boolean and positional logic (cfr Rognlien
1971:25-29),
[Page 473 ]
and the system is still batch oriented, normal response time
being one day to run the search request and additional time for
communicating with the LITE center at Denver, Colorado. For on-line
services, LITE has an understanding with the Department of Justice'
JURIS system, which operates a statutory data base fed from Denver.
The users are almost exclusively within the Defence Department
(though in principle the system is available to the Congress, the
President's Office, and the Supreme Court).
At an early stage, LITE was put through a series of tests aimed at
assessing the effectiveness of the system. The test lasted six months
in 1964 and was conducted on a data base of approximately 17 million
words. Search requests processed by LITE were compared with the
results of parallel manual research by the users - amounting to a
total of 215 separate questions. The result of the test has been
presented as a confrontation between man and the computer:
- in 7.5 per cent of the total searches the system retrieved fewer
relevant citations than were discovered by manual research;
- in 44.1 per cent of the total searches the same number of relevant
citations were retrieved by both methods;
- in 48.4 per cent the LITE system retrieved more relevant decisions
than were discovered manually.
Summing up the result, Davis (1969:9) argues that the LITE system
worked on a 92.5 per cent effectiveness rate (the ratio at which
computerized retrieval equalled or transcended manual retrieval),
while manual retrieval worked at a 51.6 per cent effectiveness rate.
The results, as presented here and by Davis, should be
interpreted in a critical perspective. In the test, one seems to have
focused on the recall capabilities of the system, while the precision
capabilities have not been illuminated. Other variables may also have
influenced the result, such as a different data base in the LITE
system from what was available to the manual researches. The recall
capabilities of the LITE
[Page 474 ]
system is, however, well documented. In a test the Bureau
of Budget processed a search request to which 137 citations were
deemed relevant. Of these, LITE retrieved 128 (93.5 per cent), while
by manual methods 85 (or 61 per cent) were retrieved. Tapper (1974:9)
reports that an internal test has shown that the average LITE search
corresponds to 18.5 man/hours manual search - making the cost of a
LITE search 23 compared to 160 for the corresponding manual search.
The LITE system has also been used for production of hard copy
indexes, selective distribution of information, etc. It may be offered
as an example of a project created for legal information retrieval,
but also as serving as the pivot in a legal information service where
the processing of search requests is only part of the services
offered. Tapper states that the production of indexes and SDI-services
have in many ways become more essential to the users than the
processing of individual search requests (1970:26). In fact, one may
argue that a KWIC hardcopy produced by LITE is a small, cheap and
portable extention of the batch system.
In 1969 LITE processed 2.682 search requests. The number of
requests have snowballed over the years; in 1973 it was 21.558 and was
expected to reach 30.780 by 1974. It is reported that ELITE'S searches
increased by 25 per cent in 1981 compared to 1980, and that the annual
growth rate for 1982 was 27 per cent based on the first seven months,
cfr ALRIPC 1983:15.
In 1974 the charge per request was 50 dollars, the total budget
650.000 dollars, and the breakeven point consequently 15.000 paid
requests per year (the charge is waived for users outside the Defence
Department), cfr Tapper 1974:9.
During 1973 the whole operation of the LITE system was reviewed by
a special committee set up by the Committee on Appropriations of the
House of Representatives. This committee reported back on 26 October
1973, recommending the continuance of the system.
One of the results of this review was the renaming of the system.
It is now known as FLITE (Federal Legal Information Through
Electronics), cfr Law & Computer Technology 1975:26. It is, as
indicated, cooperating
[Page 475 ]
with the computer center of the Congress working on the US Code,
and with the JURIS system of the Department of Justice. It has also an
agreement with West Publishing Co, which furnishes FLITE with
headnotes, getting in return statutes in computerized form. Though
FLITE seems today quite outdated due to the batch mode in which it
operates, it should not be assessed separately - but rather as part of
a Federal network of systems, probably still in the making.
The FLITE system has the longest period of practical
operation of all systems in North America and - we believe - in the
world. Consequently, the early literature on this system is
overwhelming. A selected bibliography may be found in footnote 65 to
Robert P Bigelow's paper "The Use of Computers in Law", L&CT 1975:105.
Scandinavian readers are referred to Rognlien 1971. A special issue of
the JAG Law Review of November-December 1966 presents the LITE
system, and a second edition was reprinted 1 July 1969 with some
additional material.
7.26.3 JURIS: Justice Retrieval and Inquiry System
The JURIS project was initiated in order to give the attorneys of
the United States Department of Justice greater possibilities of
conducting legal research. Introducing the system, Kondos (1971:147)
points out that there are certain "minimal standards of due process
and equal protection of law" to be afforded all US citizens, and he
goes on to state that often "fulfilment of these requirements depends
on timely access to reliable and up-to-date information". The
justification of creating a better information system is, as these
remarks illustrate, not mainly a question of economy, but of the rule
of law. As in the case of the Internal Revenue Service's system RIRA,
JURIS was created in order to overcome the availability factors
constricting access to relevant legal sources in the existing
information situation.
Users of JURIS are the more than 4.300 attorneys in the Department
of Justice, functioning as lawyers, and others needing access to legal
sources in other capacities, including US attorneys and their staff in
[Page 476 ]
the 93 judicial districts throughout the country. In total, the
Department of Justice has 54.000 employees (Rooney 1983:21).
The JURIS system is supervised by the Justice Management Division,
which has been established in concert with the Attorney General to
improve the administration and management of the Department of
Justice.
| Adress: | | US
Department of Justice |
Justice Management Division
550 11th Street, NW
WASHINGTON DC 20530 - USA
The objective of JURIS is to make available to these users legal
material gererated within the department itself, cfr Basheer 1973:55.
This material consists mainly of legal briefs, memoranda, legal
handbooks, form books, appellate briefs, legal procedure and policy
correspondence, summaries of significant reported decisions, selected
legal periodicals, case file intelligence, and evidential material for
protracted cases - cfr Kondos 1971:148, 1973:2-1. The material
exemplified here falls within the type of administrative decisions and
opinions - a type of legal sources of great importance within the
public administration, and of vital importance as regards the
principle of equality. In addition to this, the total text of the
United States Code is stored in the system (through an exchange scheme
with FLITE), the Code of Federal Regulations, Opinions of the Attorney
General (since 1971), and Executive Orders of the President. Under a
contractual arrangement with West, JURIS receives weekly updates both
of full text and digest material for its federal and digest files, cfr
Croydon 1983:172 at note 12.
JURIS also serves as the basis for the LEAA National Criminal
Justice Reference Service, which has more than 20.000 subscribers.
The total data base contains currently (Rooney 1983:23) some
8.000.000.000 characters, and more than 1.100.000 documents, among
these some 143.000 federal decisions in authentic form, headnotes for
another 145.000 federal and 350.000 state decisions.
The JURIS data base is organized in 6 libraries (autumn 1983).
[Page 477 ]
The CASELAW library contains US Supreme Court decisions
since 1900; Federal Reporter 2nd series since 1962; Federal Supplement
since 1970; Court of Claims 1956-79; Federal Rules Decisions since
1976; Court of Military Review 1951-1975; Military Justice Reporter
since 1975; Atlantic 2nd Reporter for District of Columbia cases since
1977; Bankruptcy Reporter since 1979; Claims Court since 1982.
The DIGEST (which has West headnotes) includes Supreme
Court Reporter (since 1961); Federal Reporter 2nd series (since 1960);
Federal Supplement (since 1960); Federal Rules Decisions (since 1960);
and Regional Reporters (since 1967).
The STATLAW library contains public laws from the 93rd -
97th Congress; United States Code (1976 edition including supplement
V); Executive Orders (1947-83).
The WORKPRDT library contains Crimhead, headnotes
developed by the Appellate Section, Criminal Division, 5th and 6th
Circuit; and Tax Division's summons enforcement decisions.
The ADMIN library contains decisions of the Comptroller
General (published 1921-82, unpublished 1951-83)); a selection of
decisions by the Nucelar Regulatory Commission (1972-78); and opinions
of the Attorney General (1791-1980); OLC Memoranda (1977-80); Board of
Contract Appeals (1956-82); Federal Labor Regulations Authority
(1979-82); decisions and reports on rulings of the Assistant Secretary
of Labor for labor management relations 1970-75); Federal Labor
Relations Council (1970-78); rulings on request of the Assistant
Secretary of Labor for labor management relations (1970-75); selected
HUD administrative law decisions; Code of Federal Regulations (1982
edition, titles 1, 4-5, 8, 11, 12, 14 - 16, and 26; Merit Systems
Protection Board Decisions 1979- 80.
In addition there is a data base of Shepard's citations
covering a number of different fields.
It is obvious that the data collection and
[Page 478 ]
registration of such a conglomerate of legal sources give rise to
problems. To select significant sources, individuals in each section
of each litigating division are appointed. The selected sources are
indexed and abstracted, when possible by the author of the source. The
source is then captured by various means appropriate - for instance
through a data entry system or as a by-product of typesetting (as is
the case of the Solicitor General's briefs to the Supreme Court, cfr
Kondos 1973:3-1). The data base also contains 190.000 cases in
authentic form, and headnotes for 185.000 federal cases and 470.000
state cases.
JURIS is an on-line terminal oriented system, cfr Tapper 1973:204.
The first terminals in the main Justice Department building were
installed in the autumn of 1972. In the other US attorneys' offices
the installation took place in 1973-74. The initial development effort
was terminated in 1974 (cfr Rooney 1983:22). In 1976, JURIS introduced
a customized terminal by Sanders Technology with colour-coded keys -
being the second US system opting for specialized terminals. A new
version of this terminal was introduced in 1981 - Sanders Model II.
JURIS can, however, also be accessed through other teletype-compatible
terminals.
It is reported that the introduction of more intelligent
terminals is being considered, which will incorporate an automatic
dial-up facility.
Currently, some 200 customized terminals are connected to JURIS, in
addition to an equal number of other terminals in federal offices
throughout the country (Rooney 1983:22). Apart from the Department of
Justice, 280 organizations and 60 departments or agencies have access
to the system. Major users outside the Department of Justice include
the US Supreme Court, the Court of Appeal, the White House Information
Center, the Library of Congress and congressional committees.
Currently, there are some 5.200 user identifications assigned, and
approximately 1.500 - 2.000 users are trained annually. Monthly usage
of JURIS in 1981 ranged from 2.000 - 3.000 hours connect time,
representing an average of 70.000 commands per month, or approximately
8.000 searches (which presumes more than one command). Cfr Rooney
1983:23.
In JURIS we see a more modern system emerge, compared
[Page 479 ]
to FLITE and RIRA. It is a true "second generation" text
retrieval system, oriented toward the end user and based on a on-line
philosophy.
The retrieval program is based on an adaptation of the program
developed by the National Aeronautic and Space Administration (NASA)
for their Remote Console (RECON) system, cfr Lancaster/Fayen
1973:103-109, Basheer 1973:56. This is a retrieval program originally
developed by the Lockheed Corporation, cfr Tapper 1973:204. RECON was
created as a retrieval program for users requiring access to NASA's
extensive technical library, cfr Kondos 1971:148.
RECON appears to be just one subsystem of the NASA system STIMS
(Scientific and Technical Information Modular System). The file
maintenance subsystem of STIMS is also included in JURIS, along with
file maintainance routines from FLITE, and some special programs for
interfacing the different subsystems, cfr Kondos 1971:153.
A number of retrieval strategies are available on JURIS: The basic
strategy allows a full range of Boolean operators, right-hand
truncation, and distance operators (both measured in words and
sentences). The result of each search request is termed a "set", and
these may be combined with Boolean operators as well. The documents
are structured into segments such as opinion, citation and circut.
Searches may be limited to one segment, and if none is specified, a
default segment is selected.
A number of additional features make the retrieval strategy more
flexible. The data base may be segmented by the use of prefixes. The
search request CD/AUTO requires that to satisfy the request, a
document must belong to the subset of the data base containing the US
Code (cfr Kondos 1971:151-152 for a listing of prefixes and Croydon
1980:166-167 for a review of the search language).
Through a LIMIT command, the user may restrict his search to
documents from a certain period of time. This chronological
segmentation of the data base may be conducted initially or as a final
restriction after having retrieved a number of documents.
Results from a search request may be saved in the
[Page 480 ]
system through the KEEP command. This is a function of great
value, making it possible for the user to construct standard search
requests employing them as building blocks in a number of requests.
JURIS has the possibility of incorporating a synonym thesaurus, but
as far as we know this is not currently utilized. In order to remedy
the difficulty posed by the specificity of the authentic text, the
EXPAND command may be employed. Through the EXPAND command, part of
the inverted file is displayed, showing which words in the data base
(or in the segment of the data base specified) are alphabetically
close to the search terms. The user may select synonyms from the
displayed list, and expand the original request with these words. In
JURIS, part of the West Topical Index is also contained, and the
documents are indexed with West Key Numbers. Using the EXPAND command,
the user may go into the index, explore the structure of the part of
the index in which he is interested, and select appropriate terms for
his request.
The JURIS system also has a number of ways of presenting the
retrieved documents, among them a KWIC format with highlighting of
search terms for fast relevance assessment. There are also a number of
other commands not described here, for instance an EXPLAIN command for
the inexperienced user. For a more detailed description of the JURIS
search language, cfr Basheer 1973:58-63 and Kondos 1973:11-1-13 with
examples.
A number of software amendments is reported to have taken place in
1981 - though the details are not known to us. The response time is,
however, reported to be down to one third of what was formerly
necessary, averaging 12 seconds per "search", compared to 35-40
seconds in 1976 (Ronney 1983:23). Also, JURIS changed from the Federal
Telecommunication Service to a more reliable private network for
communication (Rooney 1983:22). The system is currently available 14
hours per week day. Prior to the software amendments, uptime in the
peak hours (10:00 - 16:00) was estimated to 92 per cent, which has now
been brought up to 97 per cent - during off-peak hours it has been a
constant 100 per cent (cfr Rooney 1983:23-24).
No objective evaluation of JURIS is known to have been made, but
Basheer (1973:56) reports that in one
[Page 481 ]
instance, eight "search and seizure"-problems were researched
concurrently, one attorney using JURIS, the other conventional
methods. The first finished his search in 28.3 minutes, the second in
2 hours 20 minutes. Also, Basheer mentions an example where one hour
of attorney time using JURIS uncovered 100 additional statutory
citations after a thorough search by the Criminal Code Revision Unit.
Tapper (1974:11) points out that these evaluations are clearly
unsatisfactory.
In 1979, the Department of Justice contracted a private consulting
firm to evaluate the JURIS system - comparing JURIS and "two other
commercial systems" (Rooney 1983:22 - it would not be too risky to bet
which were these two systems). Based on the result of this inquiry -
"Automated Legal Research, an Evaluation report", US Department of
Justice, Information Systems Staff, Legal and Management Systems and
Procedures, May 1975 - the Attorney General decided in 1980 to
continue developing the JURIS system.
Based on an Executive Order under the Carter administration, the
Justice Management Division set up an Automated Legal Research
Interagency Planning Committee (ALRIPC) to provide coordination of the
further development of legal information systems. The ALRIPC decided
to make a study of the potential federal users of such services, and
delegated the design and execution of the service to FLITE. In the
conclusions, the report (ALRIPC 1983:15) states that a "tremendous
growth in number of searches and terminals" may be expected, indicated
that this may be as much as 25 per cent annually.
The policy of US federal agencies is to avoid to develop and use
public services where there are services available on the private
market, and - even more strongly emphasized - not to offer such
services in competition with the private service providers. This has
proved somewhat of a problem to JURIS. We understand that to some
extent it is controversial whether the service should be continued, or
whether the federal agencies should rely on the commercial services
which have been developed in the latter part of the 1970ies. Also,
JURIS cannot easily be offered to the offices giving free legal
assistance throughout the country. Though such offices to a large
extent are finanzed by federal funds, they are in
[Page 482 ]
principle private organizations and, as such, the federal
agencies are not free to offer them the use of their service in
competition with the private services on the market. It may be said
that in this respect, there seems to be a lack of an overall US legal
information policy - which indeed may be difficult to achieve in a
country so large and containing so many jurisdictions.
In order to achieve a better coordination with the private market,
an experiment is currently being carried out, giving JURIS users
access to WESTLAW and LEXIS by dialling up their own terminals. The
users will be using JURIS for accessing federal material, while the
non-federal data bases of JURIS are replaced by access to the two
private services. Through these, selected data bases may be searched -
initially three on each of the private systems. The experiment is
currently (1983) widened to include the users of three federal
districts.
JURIS is also being used for litigation support, and a
subdivision of the Office of Information Technology, the Litigation
Systems Staff, has been created to take care of these requirements.
More than 50 special files are currently available on JURIS, though
not all of these are litigation files.
An interesting and exciting experiment made by JURIS, is the
Sensory Assistance Center at the Department of Justice itself. The SAC
is established to assist blind or other people with an impaired sense
of sight in using legal sources. The SAC employs a talking terminal
("Magg's Talking Terminal"), where a computer governed generator reads
the text as it is printed on the screen - the speed being regulated by
a joystick on the keybord. Printouts may be taken by a LED 120 Braille
Printer Terminal. There is also an optical character reader (a
Kurzweil Data Entry Machine) in the center and hooked up to the voice
generator, and from this the sources existing only in the printed form
are read aloud to the user. The SAC is a demonstration of computer
technology being convincingly put into use as a tool for helping the
disabled.
The point is brought home by an anecdote about the
University denying a blind person access to
[Page 483 ]
the law study. A suit was brought against the University
by the Department of Justice on the grounds of unjustified
discrimination. The case of the Department of Justice was argued by a
blind attorney who had lost his sight in an accident, and who had
researched the case himself by the SAC. The Department of Justice won
the case, as the anecdote states somewhat sardonically.
7.26.4 LEXIS
In 1964 the Ohio Bar Association created a working group for
evaluating the possibility of computerized legal research. This
working group concluded in 1967 that no satisfactory system existed,
and that Ohio lawyers probably would have to create a new system. A
subsidiary of the Ohio State Bar Association was founded as a
non-profit organization under the name of OBAR, an acronym for Ohio
Bar Automated Research Corporation (cfr Asman 1973,
Harrington/Wilson/Bennet 1971:184). OBAR contracted Data Corporation
of Dayton, Ohio, which in 1964 had developed a system for the
retrieval of Air Force reconnaissance documents (cfr Rubin 1973:2).
This retrieval system was to be developed further until it was found
satisfactory by OBAR"s standards.
In the summer of 1968, Data Corporation was acquired by the Mead
Corporation - a multi-national, diversified corporation with a very
solid economy. Mead soon thereafter committed itself to underwrite
computerized legal information systems. To manage the project, the
Information Systems Division of Data Corporation was incorporated as a
wholly owned subsidiary, Mead Data Central, Inc. As president was
appointed Jerome S Rubin, who had looked into the operation on behalf
of Mead while working for a consultant company, Arthur D Little - and
Rubin proved to be a forceful and colourful spokesman for the MDC
operation until he resigned in 1981.
[Page 484 ]
| Adress: | | Mead
Data Central |
PO Box 933
DAYTON
Ohio 45401, USA
In 1969 a prototype of the system became operational, and 15
teletype terminals were placed in lawyers' offices. MDC conducted
intensive studies on how users exploited the system - and on the basis
of the "Ohio experiment" it was concluded that the system introduced
by Mead and OBAR was economically feasable and an effective approach
to computerized legal research. The system was a conventional text
retrieval system with Boolean and positional operators.
The teletype terminals crippled the first prototype of
the system. In 1970 MDC replaced these with video display terminals,
accompanied by hard copy printers, and with additional functional
features, including effective browsing capabilities, cfr Rubin
1973:20. At one time, the display terminals actually used colours for
highlighting (cfr Tapper 1973:19), but this version was discontinued.
The current terminals are using reverse video for highlightling. For a
discription of the first commercial version, see Lancaster/Fayen
1973:37-38, cfr 460-466 for search instructions and 76-77 for
characteristics.
In 1971, MDC acknowledged that a national, text retrieval
interactive service should be the goal, cfr Rubin/Krebs/Woodard
1973:16.24. It was stipulated, however, that the introduction of such
a system should only take place through participation of the organized
bar, which was all the more natural as the system had its origin in
the bar, and MDC had been working in close cooperation with OBAR all
the time.
The system, which had become informally known as the OBAR system,
was now redesigned - and at the beginning of 1973 it was launched as a
national computerized legal research service under the name LEXIS.
Since then it has grown rapidly.
MDC does not publish figures for its number of subscribers, but
until 1980 as much as 90.000 lawyers is said to have been given an
introduction to LEXIS. All law offices in the US with more than 100
lawyers, are said to subscribe to LEXIS - but it is sold even to
[Page 485 ]
smaller offices (10-20 laywers and less). A number of federal and
public agencies use the system, and law schools are offered the system
on reduced rates with restrictions for use in peak time. It is
estimated that LEXIS processes approximately 25.000 requests per day
(1982).
Three features of the LEXIS system should be pointed out: The
emphasis put on hardware and reliability, the philosophy behind the
retrieval programs, and the way in which the challenge of data base
generation and maintenance has been met.
LEXIS operates out of a dedicated computer installation in Dayton,
Ohio, basing itself on two mainframes (IBM-compatible Amdahls). All
the programs have been written by MDC - including the terminal
handling programs and modification of the original operating system.
LEXIS maintains that it has one of the most reliable computer
installations on record. The service is available on a 22 hour per day
basis on workdays, and 12 hours on holidays.
The service is available through display terminals designed for
easy use by the lawyer. The terminals have been especially designed
for LEXIS, and are of a standard and an executive (desk top) type
called UBIQ for ubiquitous. The UBICs cluster around concentrators -
some firms having as much as 100 UBIQs (an example is given by
Kaynor/McMorrow 1982:31). The terminals feature at keyboard with a
number of non-standard function keys ("next case", "KWIC",
"search", etc), and several options of hardcopy printers. They are
consciously designed to reassure the user that no technical know-how
is necessary for using the equipment.
The service is available only through the customized terminals, and
this has certainly been a controversial aspect of MDC services. It
should be born in mind that at the time LEXIS was launched, there were
probably no standard display terminals around which satisfied the
rather strict standards of MDC. This has changed radically during the
years in which the system has been available, and in a situation where
a terminal is interfacing a computer network with a number of
available information services, the MDC philosophy would seem quite
difficult to sustain. Unconfirmed information maintains that MDC has
now
[Page 486 ]
accepted non-customized terminals to be hooked into the LEXIS
system, but that they have to conform to the standards set by MDC.
This may signal a greater flexibility with respect to the MDC policy
on terminals.
Actually, it has become known by the autumn of 1983 that
MDC has made an agreement with IBM to give the IBM personal computer
an interface to LEXIS. This heralds a major policy change, and should
also be seen as part of IBM's strategy of making their PC a lawyer's
working station. IBM may make similar deals with for instance West,
which would make the same PC (which would have integrated modems and
automatic dial-up facilities) interface several major information
services.
Response time in the LEXIS system is very short for more than 90
per cent of all search requests less than 15 seconds, for all other
commands 1 second or less, cfr Rubin 1973:31. Performance
specifications, including response time, are guaranteed in MDC's
sponsoring organization contracts, which are incorporated in the
agreement with subscribers (cfr appendix to Moon/Oskamp 1983).
The system is fast and reliable. It should be recognized that this
basic reliability was no small achievement at the time when the
service was launched, and and that this level of achievment was
reached only after major investments. This only indirectly affects the
legal retrieval system, but it is our belief that without the
confidence invited by the sturdy and reliable service offered by
LEXIS, it would indeed have been difficult to make the venture a
commercial success. Probably it has also paved the way for later
ventures, both in the US and elsewhere, demonstrating that a reliable
computerized legal retrieval service could be offered to the end user
on a nationwide basis.
The second feature is the philosophy behind the retrieval system
itself. LEXIS has been described as a "computerized reading glass",
and in many respects this is a good characterization of its basic
design. Great care has been taken to provide fast access to retrieved
documents, to facilitate browsing, etc. For instance a KWIC format is
available - that section of
[Page 487 ]
the retrieved document which contains the terms of the search
request is displayed on the screen with the terms highlighted. The
documents of LEXIS - mainly representing case law - are lacking in the
US data base headnotes. As discussed above under sect 3.3.3 (3),
abstracts facilitate relevance assessment. In order to compensate for
this deficiency of functional performance in document design, LEXIS
has emphasized good and powerful browsing capabilities - it is easier
to flip through the screens on the LEXIS terminal, than to thumb
through cases in a conventional library (cfr Rubin 1973:31).
The KWIC format has aroused the enthusiasm of lawyers. One of the
special uses to which the format is put, is the listing of citations.
Using a citation as a search request, all documents citing the case
will be retrieved and the bit of text embedding the citation may be
printed out. Preston (1971:191) points out with gusto that what
earlier would require "lawyer time" now might "be done by a girl at
the console" (!) - coining the term "obarizing" for this retrieval
strategy as a parallell to "Shepardizing", which implies using the
traditional Shepard's citation index. The strategy is now informally
called "LEXISing" - and MDC stresses that the lawyer himself can best
determine the usefulness of the citations presented on the terminal.
Citations were also implemented in an index being the result of a
collaborative effort between MDC the Lawyers Co-operative Publishing
Company and its affiliate, Bancroft-Whitney, known as Auto-Cite
(Kaynor/McMorrow 1982:29). Though of excellent quality, lawyers seemed
to prefer the Shepard's citation index (published by Shepard, now
acquired by McGraw Hill) - which was implemented on the competing
WESTLAW system in a very elegant manner. Since 1982 LEXIS has acquired
license to use the Shepard's index as well.
LEXIS also includes references to case reporters - to West's as
well as reporters published by others. These costs are covered by the
publishers, who see an advantage in having such citations included.
Search requests are formulated in a conventional manner using
Boolean and positional operators, and priority between these may be
determined by parenthesises. A request may be formulated in a series
of
[Page 488 ]
"levels", and earlier levels may be modified to amend the
request. A request may be carried from one library to the next, but no
general facility for saving requests is available. Also no ranking can
be made of the documents, but they are presented to the user in
reverse chronological order. The MDC has kept the search language
rather simple, not offering a range of sophisticated techniques for
searching. The emphasis has been put on making a stable and quite
transparent system.
The sophistication is, however, introduced behind the scenes by the
most recent release of the retrieval software - LEXIS 80 (1980). This
has been described as a "forgiving system", cushioning the user with
several forms of aid. Though having no general thesaurus function,
LEXIS has automatic expansion of search terms to plurals, and
inflexions of verbs. A universal character provides a masking function
(including truncation), which can be used to replace any of the
letters of the search term, excluding the first letter or letters.
Violations of the syntax of the search language will not always lead
to a reject from the system, but a tentative interpretation which will
be processed if the user confirms by pressing the enter key.
The HELP function is also very advanced and dynamic, using
information of where the user exits the system to provide pertinent
help. The HELP function is actually integrated in the computer
assisted instruction program available for LEXIS - the pertinent point
is explained through a CAI dialogue.
Also, several distance operators may be used in a sequence.
Actually, LEXIS distance operators work only on words, not on
sentences or sections - which may be somewhat surprising, as the two
latter elements have a semantic reference which make them very
suitable as distance delimeters.
Though impressive, the retrieval program lacks several features
often incorporated in text retrieval programs, and often considered
important. The user cannot save and refer back to former requests
(with the exception of the level by level amendment of the current
query), and one cannot focus within a retrieved document with a term
different from the search term.
[Page 489 ]
MDC maintains that most requests are quite simple by structure, and
that emphasis should be put on the "reading glass"-function rather
than on sophisticated search functions - implying a slightly higher
priority to the relevance assessment than perhaps usually found in
computerized systems. In a fast system, the user may flip through a
few irrelevant documents without being irritated, and the final
relevance assessment must nevertheless be with the user.
The MDC has emphasized that their service (as, indeed the service
of most legal text retrieval systems) is designed for the end user.
Many systems have reported an unexpected use by mid-users, and a
reason for this has clearly been too complicated user interfaces. One
would expect this trend to be predominant also in the US, where there
has been an explosive growth in the employment of para-legals by law
firms during the 1970ies. MDC maintains that there is a current trend
away from mid-users, citing their own presumably reliable (though
unpublished) user surveys as a source.
The MDC arguments for their philosophy are sound and down to earth.
Nevertheless, one may have a more powerful search language without
losing the qualities given priority by MDC.
The education of users and the cooperation with the bar
associations should also be mentioned. It is generally recognized that
the education of a user is crucial and difficult, and like other
commercial services, MDC sells their educational programs along with
the initial subscription. Through the cooperation with the bar
associations, MDC has access to user opinion and experience. This
continuous feedback has certainly been one of the factors which during
the first years determined what parts of the system should be given
highest priority.
No objective evaluation of the LEXIS system has been published. Of
the Ohio lawyers using the system in the early 1970ies, 78 per cent
reported that it was at least 5 times as fast as conventional
research, and 41 per cent found it at least 13 times as fast. As much
as 94 per cent found that the results were at least as comprehensive
as in conventional research, 68 per cent found it more comprehensive,
and 28 per
[Page 490 ]
cent found it much more comprehensive (cfr Rubin 1973:8). User
polls like these probably are of limited value apart from being an
expression of user attitudes. It might be thought that LEXIS
aggregated data on the use of its system for evaluative purposes, but
MDC has a very strict policy in respect to the privacy of their
clients, and does not save such data - even for statistical purposes.
The privacy does not, however, go as far as to protect
the persons mentioned in the decisions, and especially not the judges.
It seems to be a common and practical use of LEXIS to retrieve
decisions of a judge to whom the lawyer is to plead a case - in order
to make oneself familiar with the experience and attitudes of this
judge, and, presumably, prepare a strategy of argument which is
promising in the light of earlier decisions. Such use of a legal
information system would not be found unproblematic within many
jurisdictions, and it may be of interest to note that the Swedish Data
Inspectorate has directed the national provider of legal information
services, DAFA, in their contract with users explicitly to prohibit
retrieval of the names of persons. The background is, however,
slightly different (cfr the section on Sweden), but may nevertheless
illustrate different attitudes in different countries.
The data base of LEXIS is constantly growing. In 1980 its volume
was 20.000.000.000 characters text available from terminal for
retrieval and browsing. LEXIS mainly documents case law, both on a
federal and state level - and does obviously have an impressive
publication ratio within this documentation area. Statutory material
is documented only to a limited extent, one reason indicated is that
West has often copyright to state compilations of statutes. Projects
in this area are, however, under consideration.
Its data base is organized in 8 libraries.
The general library contains the US Code; Supreme Court decisions
(since 1925); Court of Appeals decisions (since 1945); District Court
decisions (since 1960); and Court of Claims decisions (since 1977).
The securities library contains relevant sections
[Page 491 ]
from the US Code; securities cases decided by the Supreme Cort,
Courts of Appeals and District Courts (all since 1933); final and
proposed regulations under the Securities Act and issued by the Board
of Governors of the Federal Reserve System; administrative
determinations like no-action letters (since 1971); a selection of
decisions by the Securities and Exchange Commission (since 1933); and
a selection of interpretive releases from the same authority (since
1933); legislative history in the form of House, Senate and Conference
reports on the 1933 and 1934 Acts and amendments.
The tax library contains the internal revenue code; regulations;
the Cumulative Bulletin (since 1954); Private rulings released to the
public (since 1977) and those released and classified "reference"
1954-1977; tax cases of the Supreme Court (since 1913), of the
District Courts (since 1960), and of the Court of Claims (since 1942),
tax court opinions and memoranda decisions (since the beginning,
1942); legislative history of the 1954 code and amendments.
The trade regulation library contains administrative decisions of
the Commissioner (since 1950), administrative Law Judges' initial
decisions (since 1950) and their procedural orders (since 1976), and
consent and interlocutory orders (since 1970); trade regulation cases
of the Supreme Court (since 1890), of the Courts of Appeal (since
1945) and District Courts (since 1950).
The patent, trademark and copyright library contains such cases
decided by the supreme court (since 1850); Court of Customs and Patent
Appeals (since 1952); Courts of Appeal (since 1945); District Courts
(since 1960); and Court of Claims (since 1977).
The communications library contains the Federal Communications
Commission Reports, 2nd series; volume 39 on frequency allocations
(since 1939); volume 40 on sponsorship identifications, equal time,
fairness doctrine, and FM frequency allocations (since 1941); volume
41 on television (since 1950); and volume 42 on common carriers and
safety and special radio services (since 1947); cases of the Supreme
Court (since 1936), Courts of Appeal (since 1929), and District Courts
(since 1960).
[Page 492 ]
The labour library, containing the National Labor Relations Board
Reports (since 1972); cases decided by the Supreme Court (since 1932),
Courts of Appeals (since 1945), and District Courts (since 1947).
Also a Delaware corporate law library is established, containing
the Delaware cases construing the general corporation law (reported
decisions since 1898 and unreported since 1970), and federal decisions
(Supreme Court since 1925, Courts of Appeal since 1945, and District
Courts since 1960).
The state law library is extensive, and will only briefly be listet
alphabetically:
Alabama (Supreme Court since 1965, Court of Appeals 1965-1969,
Court of Criminal Appeals since 1969, Court of Civil Appeals since
1969.
Alaska (Supreme Court since 1965).
Arizona (Supreme Court since 1965, Court of Appeals since 1965).
Arkansas (reports since 1965, Court of Appeals since 1979).
California (Reports, 2nd series since 1945, 3rd series, Appellate
Reports, 2nd series since 1955, Appellate Reports 3rd series).
Colorado (Supreme Court since 1965, Court of Appeals since 1970)
Connecticut (Reports since 1965, Supplement since 1965, Circuit
reports 1965-75).
Delaware (Supreme Court since 1965, Court of Chancery since 1965,
Superior Court since 1965).
District of Columbia (Court of Appeals since 1965).
Florida (Supreme Court since 1955, District Courts of Appeal since
1957).
Georgia (Supreme Court since 1965, Court of Appeals since 1965).
Hawaii (Supreme Court since 1965).
Idaho (Supreme Court since 1965).
Illinois (Reports since 1945, Reports 2nd series, Appellate Court
Reports, 2nd Series since 1955, 3rd series.
Indiana (Reports since 1965, Court of Appeals since 1965).
Iowa (Supreme Court since 1965, Court of Appeals since 1977).
[Page 493 ]
Kansas (Constitution, statutes, Supreme Court since 1963, Court of
Appeals since 1977).
Kentucky (Supreme Court since 1955, Court of Appeals since 1976).
Louisiana (Supreme Court since 1965, Courts of Appeal since 1965).
Maine (Supreme Judicial Court since 1965).
Maryland (Reports since 1965, Appellate Reports since 1967).
Massachusetts (Reports since 1950, Appeals Court since 1972).
Michigan (Reports since 1955, Appeals Reports since 1965).
Minnesota (Reports since 1965).
Mississippi (Supreme Court since 1965).
Missouri (Constitution, Revised Statutes and Session Laws, Supreme
Court since 1945, Court of Appeals since 1945).
Montana (Supreme Court since 1965).
Nebraska (Reports since 1965).
Nevada (Supereme Court since 1965).
New Hampshire (Supreme Court since 1965).
New Jersey (Supreme Court since 1948, Superior Court since 1965).
New Mexico (Supreme Court since 1965, Court of Appeals since 1966).
New York (Constitution, Consolidated Laws, Reports since 1940, 2nd
series. Appellate Division Reports 2nd series, Miscellaneous Reports
2nd series.
North Carolina (Reports since 1965, Court of Appeals Reports since
1968).
North Dakota (Supreme Court since 1965).
Ohio (Constitution, Revised Code and Rules of Civil Procedures,
Reports since 1821, State Reports since 1852, 2nd series, Appellate
Reports since 1913, 2nd series, Law Abstracts since 1922,
Miscellaneous Reports since 1965.
Oklahoma (Supreme Court since 1965, Court of Criminal Appeals since
1965, Court of Appeals 1969.
Oregon (Reports since 1965, Court of Appeals Reports since 1969).
Pennsylvania (Supreme Court since 1955, Superior Court since 1955,
Commonwealth Court since 1970).
Rhode Island (Supreme Court since 1965).
South Carolina (Supreme Court since 1965).
South Dakota (Supreme Court since 1965).
[Page 494 ]
Tennessee (Supreme Court since 1965, Court of Appeals since 1967,
Court of Criminal Appeals since 1967).
Texas (Supreme Court since 1955, Court of Criminal Appeals since
1965, Courts of Civil Appeals since 1965).
Utah (Supreme Court since 1965).
Vermont (Reports since 1965).
Virginia (Supreme Court 1965).
Washington (Reports 2nd series since 1965, Appellate Reports since
1969).
West Virginia (Supreme Court of Appeals since 1965).
Wisconsin (Reports 2nd series since 1965, Court of Appeals since
1978).
Wyoming (Supreme Court since 1965).
LEXIS has created its own data collection system, which reaches
down to every court and in principle every judge being a part of the
LEXIS documentation area. This collection is to a great extent
parallel to that one made by West for its system and reporters - but
is independent. Therefore, decisions may be documented in LEXIS though
unreported. It is maintained that the LEXIS data base contains 10 per
cent more US District Court opinions than that of WESTLAW (1980).
Actually, the documentation of unreported cases in the mind of many
users is one of the points in favour of LEXIS. But the use of
unreported cases creates problems within the legal system, both in the
US and elsewhere.
Data capture on such a scale as required by MDC is, of course, a
major operation. An accuracy standard of 99.99 per cent (in respect to
characters) is imposed on the material. This is achieved by double
registration and automated error correction at the LEXIS center in
Dayton. For retrospective documentation, LEXIS employs oversea
entrepreneurs (cfr Tapper 1974:15), for new material MDC encourages
sponsoring professional organizations to find solutions for capturing
data at the source (cfr Rubin 1973:20).
The cost of the system is a sum of several factors. Pursuant to its
contracts with private and most government subscribers, MDC charges
nonrecurring fees for terminal installation and user training, monthly
[Page 495 ]
fees for equipment and communications, hourly fees for the use of
the service, and incidental fees for off-line printing. Since 1974,
LEXIS services may be obtained with no minimum use commitment.
LEXIS has diversified in two ways.
Firstly, it has grown out of the US jurisdictions. Through
Butterworth Telepublishing, LEXIS is offering a service to British
lawyers on a data base prepared by Butterworth (cfr under UK), and
through Tele Consulte (a subsidiary of the publishing firm Hachette),
a corresponding service has been made available to French lawyers (cfr
under France). MDC has announced its willingness to move into any
jurisdiction and offer systems on a similar basis, but has met
considerable problems in two of the most obvious choices - Australia
and Canada. In both these jurisdictions, there has been a skeptical
attitude towards the LEXIS service, mainly due to the pricing
structure, which favours big law firms, and which is feared to create
new forms of availability discrimination. The policy in Canada has
been rather explicitly formulated for offering an improvement in the
information situation of small lawyers through computerized systems.
At least in Australia one has considered invoking Crown Copyright in
case law material in order to secure control of which systems will be
permitted to document Australian law (cfr under Australia).
Secondly, it has diversified its services. For a long time,
accountants have been a major user group under the LEXIS system, and
an Accounting Information library has been made to serve their needs
containing annual reports of some 4.000 companies (cfr Kaynor/McMorrow
1982:31). A parallel service to LEXIS has been established, known as
NEXIS, which documents new articles, from Washington Post,
Newsweek and other sources. This has also attracted the
interest of lawyers, who in interviews have revealed that they have
searched the news for information on, for instance, the judge or their
opponents. A more interesting diversification is, however, their offer
of litigation support through a client file - the client may send
material to MDC, which will create a special file for litigation
support that, of course, is available only to the client (cfr Stanley
1980:153-155). Even Encyclopedia Britannica is available in its
authentic text through LEXIS. A LEXIS user does not have
[Page 496 ]
to subscribe to all its services, one may for instance exclude
NEXIS, and the libraries of foreign jurisdictions (England and Wales,
and France).
7.26.5 WESTLAW
West is the largest legal publisher in the United States - having
2.600 employees (among these 150 legal editors) and a weekly export
from their warehouse in St Paul, Minnesota, of approximately a quarter
of a million books (1980). West is more than a publishing company - it
is something of an institution of the legal system of the US, gluing
it together with its numerous and important publications.
In 1975 West Publishing Company announced its Computer Law
Retrieval Service (cfr Ginnow 1975), which was launched under the name
WESTLAW (cfr Tapper 1976:9). The system is serviced out of West's IBM
computer facilities (1980: IBM 3033) in St Paul, Minnesota.
| Adress: | | West
Publishing Company |
PO Box 3526
ST PAUL
Minnesota 55165 - USA
The data base of this service was initially the headnotes of cases,
as reported in the West publications. It was argued that this gave
better retrieval capabilities and facilitated the relevance assessment
of the user. Though the latter is probably true, empirical research
hardly supported the former assertion.
The retrieval programs were purchased from the Canadian QL systems
(cfr Tapper 1974:3-4, 1976:9), though already at this first stage
several changes were made in the programs - one of them being the
inclusion of positional logic. This was implemented by having the
programs read the text file for those documents retrieved by the
Boolean request - which was probably not efficient enough within the
very competitive US market.
LEXIS was actually becoming a competitor to West - Rubin maintained
that LEXIS was the first viable
[Page 497 ]
alternative to West's Federal Reporter System. On the other hand,
WESTLAW became from the very beginning the major competitor to LEXIS.
The differences between the WESTLAW and LEXIS service are several.
Firstly, West is the most experienced and major legal publisher in the
US, and has the advantages of an established organization for
collection of cases, of cooperation with Federal and State
administration, etc. However, when WESTLAW entered the scene, LEXIS
had already successfully established its own collection organization.
West started computerized typesetting in the mid 1960ies, and is in
principle able to make secondary use of the computerized data for its
retrieval system - which would share the costs on data capture among
retrieval systems and books. In practice, however, this has proved
difficult, as the post-editing necessary for utilizing the data for
the retrieval system was rather complex. The sharing of costs may also
become less of an advantage as the material increasingly becomes
available in a compatible computerized form from word processors at
the source.
Secondly, WESTLAW was supported by a more sophisticated retrieval
system with several additional options for the user. This system has
not, however, been stable. Its point of departure is the QL systems
retrieval programs, but it is maintained that there have been made
more than 250 amendments in the original program, and that today
little is left of the originals. This has not been without costs in
terms of reduced reliability and several rather major changes in the
user interface.
Today retrieval is based on the use of Boolean operators, but one
of the original ranking algorithms of QL systems has been retained
(different words in the search request also occurring in the
document). This actually permits natural language search requests
(Herman 1980:157) - though empirical research would indicate that the
performance is less than adequate. Right hand truncation is avialable,
and the inverted file may be looked up. Priorities between operators
cannot be determined by paranthesises, but this inclusion is (1980)
under consideration. Different words from those of the request may be
highlighted in a retrieved document through the use of the LOCATE
[Page 498 ]
command. It is not really a KWIC format, one accesses a
preformated screen image containing the specified term.
Users are encouraged to take on-line training courses in
the use of WESTLAW. These are available free of charge.
Shephard's citation indexes are integrated in WEST-LAW. Shepard
(which is now acquired by McGraw Hill) is integrated in an elegant
way. Retrieving one case, one may, by a simple command access the
citation index and have displayed the citations of this case. Each
citation has a reference number, and using this, one may access the
case in the WESTLAW data base (if part of the data base) by keying the
reference number (which gererates a LOCATE command.
It is reported (February 1984) that WESTLAW has
introduced a new citator service known as INSTA-CITE.
Thirdly, WESTLAW does not require any customized terminal. In
principle it is compatible with a number of standard communication
protocols, for instance the simple TTY-protocol. West also certifies
communicating word processing systems, intelligent terminals and
personal computers, which can double up as terminals for WESTLAW - in
the beginning of 1984, some 75 different computers were approved.
West has introduced a customized terminal known as WALT
(West's Automatic Law Terminal) designed for user friendliness. This
offers automatic dial-up, a number of function keys and programmable
sign-on procedures which allow WALT to connect to other information
services.
But the fourth difference, however, represented the main difference
at the first stage - the LEXIS data base included the authentic text
of the case (excluding headnotes), while the WESTLAW data base
included only headnotes. West probably reasoned that the system would
function as a supplemental retrieval tool in respect to a conventional
library of West publications. When the user retrieved a reference, he
would look up the case in a bound volume.
We have stated earlier that the power of a
[Page 499 ]
computerized system as a purely retrieval tool has often been
overstated. On the other hand, it would also seem obvious that a user
finding a headnote which would seem to indicate a relevant case, would
appreciate the possibility to dip into the authentic text in order to
make more than a provisional relevance assessment.
The confrontation between headnotes and authentic text ended in
1978 by West changing its policy and including the authentic text in
the documents - which of course have still the headnotes, including
the West Key Numbers. West has called this document design "full text
plus" in order to emphasize that more than the authentic text is
included. The use of Key Numbers is an important aspect, as this makes
it easy to find a retrieved case in the published reporters. Users
have maintained that it is the inclusion of abstracts in the document
which is the most important and valuable difference between WESTLAW
and LEX-IS - cfr Kaynor/McMorrow 1982:32.
West would seem - correctly - to emphasize the relation
between different information systems, both computerized and manual.
The company also supports a microform service, Ultrafiche, for case
reporters.
The data base is organized in 5 general libraries, 50 state
libraries, and some miscellanous services
The Federal Statutory Law library contains the US Code.
The Federal Regulations library contains the Code of Federal
Regulations.
The Federal Case Law library contains Supreme Court Reporter,
Federal Reporter 2nd, Federal Supplement, and Federal Rules Decisions.
The Federal Special Interest libraries is divided into 7 major
sections - Federal Tax, Securities, Labor, Antitrust and Business
Regulation, Communications, Bankruptcy, and Government Contracts.
The tax section contains code, regulation and
administrative material; administrial memoranda; written
determinations; and case law - Supreme
[Page 500 ]
Court (since 1932) and Court of Appeals, Court of Claims,
District Courts and Tax Court (reported and memoranda decisions) since
1954.
The Securities section contains the relevant section of
the US Code and Code of Federal Regulation; case law from the Supreme
Court, Courts of Appeals and Court of Claims; and SEC material
(decisions since 1934, interpretative releases since 1933, no-action
letters since 1971).
The Labor Section contains the relevant sections of the
US Code and Code of Federal Regulations; case law from the Supreme
Court, Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and Court of Claims; NLRB
decisions (since 1972); and OSHRC reports (since 1971).
The Antitrust and Business Regulation section contains
the relevant sections of the US Code and Code of Federal Regulations;
case law from the Supreme Court, Courts of Appeals, District Courts,
and Courts of Claims; and FTC decisions since 1959.
The Communications section contains the relevant sections
of the US Code and Code of Federal Regulations; case law from the
Supreme Court, Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and Courts of
Claims; and FCC decisions.
The Bankruptcy section contains the relevant sections of
the US Code and Code of Federal Regulations; case law from the West
Bankruptcy Reporter (since 1979); SEC Reorganization Reports.
The Government Contracts section contains the relevant
sections of the US Code and Code of Federal Regulations; case law from
the Supreme Court (since 1932), Courts of Appeals (since 1945),
District Courts (since 1950), and Courts of Claims (since 1954); and
Board of Contract Appeals decisions.
Also, WESTLAW has a data base on insurance (state insurance cases);
Military Justice Reporter since 1978; a Forensic Services Dictionary,
and Black's Law Dictionary.
[Page 501 ]
WESTLAW has also a state law library covering the 50 states, with
special coverage for California, Louisiana, Minnesota, New Jersey, New
York, Texas, and Washington. The libraries are organized in regional
files according to the National Reporter System of West, though
individual states may be searched separately. All states have cases in
authentic form since 1967, and headnotes since 1956 for the Supreme
Court and Courts of Appeals. In the summary below, only deviations and
the pertinent reporter is listed.
Alabama - Southern Reporter
Alaska - Pacific Reporter
Arizona - Pacific Reporter
Arkansas - South Western Reporter
California - Supreme Court since 1945 (authentic form), headnotes
for other courts only since 1960 - California Reporter
Colorado - Court of Appeals (authentic form since 1970, and no
headnotes for this court) - Pacific Reporter
Connecticut - Atlantic Reporter
Delaware - including Court of Chancery - Atlantic Reporter
District of Columbia - only Court of Appeals - Atlantic Reporter
Florida - Southern Reporter
Georgia - South Eastern Reporter
Hawaii - Pacific Reporter
Idaho - only Supreme Court - Pacific Reporter
Illinois - North Eastern Reporter
Indiana - North Eastern Reporter
Iowa - authentic form since 1977 for Court of Appeals, no headnotes
for this court - North Western Reporter
Kansas - Pacific Reporter
Kentucky - South Western Reporter
Louisiana - Southern Reporter
Maine - only Supreme Judicial Court - Atlantic Reporter
Maryland - Atlantic Reporter
Massachusetts - authentic form only since 1972 for Appeals Court -
North Eastern Reporter
Michigan - North Western Reporter |