Use of celex numbers for legal information retrieval
Vol.8,No.2(2016)
From 1 July 2013 the EU Official Journal is published in electronic form through the EUR-Lex platform. Therefore, this platform is comprehensive source of authentic and non-authentic information regarding EU law. Despite this progress, that is however still not present in the Czech Republic, the EUR-Lex is facing occasional criticism because of the lack of user-friendliness and clarity. Isolated directive or other document can not be considered a legal information, but merely the legal datum.
Given the specificity of the decisions of the Court of Justice of the EU, we are able to achieve communication of the resulting legal information only after linking the decision with the text of the respective directive. Therefore, access to these related documents should be extremely simple and should allow for easy orientation of the user. Currently, EUR-Lex does not provide this comfort as the case law related to its directive or regulation is displayed only by so-called celex number. In this paper we discuss the structure of celex number and the possibility to use existing XML structure maintained by EUR-Lex for automatization of some search functions. Our paper is based on the following premises:Relevant legal information includes the opinion of the advocate general, which is currently impossible to locate easily (these opinions are not present in the list of related documents).
Relevant legal information is the information about existence of unresolved preliminary questions brought before the CJEU; however, this information can not be easily ascertained given the current form of displaying of the related documents.
Based on existing metadata structure in which EUR-Lex operates (especially celex numbers as unique identifiers of individual documents), it is possible to automate some research operations and to fix the above mentioned shortcomings of the current search.
Jakub Harašta
Ústav práva a technologií
Právnická fakulta Masarykovy univerzity
Veveří 70
611 80 Brno
Martin Loučka
Legal Technologies, s.r.o.
Čápkova 28/21
602 00 Brno
legal information; legal information retrieval; EUR-Lex; celex number
BAŇOUCH, Hynek a Zdeněk KÜHN. O publikaci a citaci judikatury aneb proč je někdy judikatura jako císařovy nové šaty. Právní rozhledy. 2005, roč. 13, č. 13, s. 484-491
BOBEK, Michal, KÜHN, Zdeněk a kol. Judikatura a právní argumentace. 2. přepracované a aktualizované vydání. Praha: Auditorium, 2013.
BOBEK, Michal. A Fourth in the Court: Why Are There Advocates General in the Court of Justice. Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies, 2012, roč. 14, s. 529-561.
David C. Blair a M. E. Maron. An evaluation of retrieval effectiveness for a full-text document-retrieval system. Communications of the ACM, 1985, roč. 28, č. 3, s. 289-299.
DERLÉN, Mattias a Johan LINDHOLN. Goodbye van Gend en Loos, Hello Bosman? Using Network Analysis to Measure the Importance of Individual CJEU Judgments. European Law Journal, 2014, roč. 20, č. 5, s. 667-687.
FOWLER, James H. a Sangick JEON. The authority of Supreme Court precedent. Social Networks, 2008, roč. 30, č. 1, s. 16-30.
FOWLER, James H. et al. Network Analysis and the Law: Measuring the Legal Importance of Precedents at the U.S. Supreme Court. Political Analysis, 2007, roč. 15, č. 3, s. 324-346.
GARFIELD, Eugene. Citation Indexes for Science. Science, 1955, roč. 122, č. 3159, s. 108-111.
GEIST, Anton. The Open Revolution: Using Citation Analysis to Improve Legal Text Retrieval. European Journal of Legal Studies, 2010, roč. 2, č. 3, s. 137-145.
KONIARIS, Marios, ANAGNOSTOPOULOS, Ioannis a Yannis VASSILIOU. Legislation as a complex network: Modelling and analysis of European Union legal sources. In: HOEKSTRA, Rinke (ed.). JURIX 2014: The Twenty-Seventh Annual Conference. Amsterdam: IOS Press, 2014, s. 143-152.
KŘÍŽ, Vincent, HLADKÁ, Barbora, DĚDĚK, Jan a Martin NEČASKÝ. Statistical Recognition of References in Czech Court Decisions. In: GELBUKH, Lexander, ESPINOZA, Félix Castro a Sofía N. GALICIA-HARO (eds.). Human-Inspired Computing and its Applications. MICAI 2014. Springer: Berlin, Heidelberg, 2014, s. 51-61.
LANDES, William M. LESSIG, Lawrence a Michael E. SOLIMINE. Judicial Influence: A Citation Analysis of Federal Courts of Appeals Judges. Journal of Legal Studies, 1998, roč. 27, č. 2, s. 271-332.
LUPU, Yonatan a Erik VOETEN. Precedent in International Courts: A Network Analysis of Case Citations by the European Court of Human Rights. British Journal of Political Science, 2012, roč. 42, č. 2, s. 413-439.
LUPU, Yonatan a James H. FOWLER. Strategic Citations to Precedent on the U.S. Supreme Court. Journal of Legal Studies, 2013, roč. 42, č. 1, s. 151-186.
MOENS, Maria-Francine. Innovative techniques for legal text retrieval. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 2001, roč. 9, č. 1, s. 29-57.
MYŠKA, Matěj, HARAŠTA, Jakub, LOUTOCKÝ, Pavel a Jakub MÍŠEK. Revue pro právo a technologie, 2016, roč. 7, č. 13, s. 147-189.
PRICE, Derek J. de Solla. Network of Scientific Papers. Science, 1965, roč. 149, č. 3683, s. 510-515.
SADL, Urška a Yannis PANAGIS. What is Leading Case in EU Law? An Empirical Analysis. European Law Review, 2015, roč. 40, č. 1, s. 15-34.
SCHWEIGHOFER, Erich. The Revolution in Legal Information Retrieval or The Empire Strikes Back. Journal of Information, Law and Technology, 1999, roč. 4, č. 1, nestránkováno.
SMITH, Linda C.. Citation Analysis. Library Trends, 1981, roč. 30, č. 1, s. 83-106.
STUPKA, Václav. E-Sbírka a e-Legislativa. Revue pro právo a technologie, 2014, roč. 5, č. 9, s. 185-196.
WIDDISON, Robin. New Perspectives in Legal Information Retrieval. International Journal of Law and Information Technology, 2002, roč. 10, č. 1, s. 41-70.
Copyright © 2016 ProInflow: Časopis pro informační vědy