|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ABSTRACT
The paper presents an action-based formal language called CL for abstract specification of legal contracts. The purpose of the language is to be used to reason about legal contracts (and electronic contracts on the long run). CL combines the legal notions obligation, permission, and prohibition from deontic logic with the action modality of propositional dynamic logic (PDL). The deontic modalities are applied only over actions, thus following the ought-to-do approach. The language includes a synchrony operator to model "actions performed at the same time", and a special complementation operation to encode the violation of obligations. The language has a formal semantics in terms of normative structures, specially defined to capture several natural properties of legal contracts. We focus on the informal presentation of the choices made when designing CL, and its semantics. REFERENCES
Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.
INDEX TERMS
Primary Classification:
Additional Classification:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||