Abstract:This paper addresses a critical gap in legal analytics by developing and applying a novel taxonomy for topic modelling summary judgment cases in the United Kingdom. Using a curated dataset of summary judgment cases, we use the Large Language Model Claude 3 Opus to explore functional topics and trends. We find that Claude 3 Opus correctly classified the topic with an accuracy of 87.10%. The analysis reveals distinct patterns in the application of summary judgments across various legal domains. As case law in the United Kingdom is not originally labelled with keywords or a topic filtering option, the findings not only refine our understanding of the thematic underpinnings of summary judgments but also illustrate the potential of combining traditional and AI-driven approaches in legal classification. Therefore, this paper provides a new and general taxonomy for UK law. The implications of this work serve as a foundation for further research and policy discussions in the field of judicial administration and computational legal research methodologies.
Abstract:To undertake computational research of the law, efficiently identifying datasets of court decisions that relate to a specific legal issue is a crucial yet challenging endeavour. This study addresses the gap in the literature working with large legal corpora about how to isolate cases, in our case summary judgments, from a large corpus of UK court decisions. We introduce a comparative analysis of two computational methods: (1) a traditional natural language processing-based approach leveraging expert-generated keywords and logical operators and (2) an innovative application of the Claude 2 large language model to classify cases based on content-specific prompts. We use the Cambridge Law Corpus of 356,011 UK court decisions and determine that the large language model achieves a weighted F1 score of 0.94 versus 0.78 for keywords. Despite iterative refinement, the search logic based on keywords fails to capture nuances in legal language. We identify and extract 3,102 summary judgment cases, enabling us to map their distribution across various UK courts over a temporal span. The paper marks a pioneering step in employing advanced natural language processing to tackle core legal research tasks, demonstrating how these technologies can bridge systemic gaps and enhance the accessibility of legal information. We share the extracted dataset metrics to support further research on summary judgments.
Abstract:Personal Social Ontology (PSO), it is proposed, is how an individual perceives the ontological properties of terms. For example, an absolute fatalist would arguably use terms that remove any form of agency from a person. Such fatalism has the impact of ontologically defining acts such as winning, victory and success, for example, in a manner that is contrary to how a non-fatalist would ontologically define them. While both a fatalist and non-fatalist would agree on the dictionary definition of these terms, they would differ on what and how they can be caused. This difference between the two individuals, it is argued, can be induced from the co-occurrence of terms used by each individual. That such co-occurrence carries an implied social ontology, one that is specific to that person. The use of principal social perceptions -as evidenced by the social psychology and social neuroscience literature, is put forward as a viable method to feature engineer such texts. With the natural language characterisation of these features, they are then usable in machine learning pipelines.