In this work it is argued that legal justification can best be studied from a procedural, dialogical point of view and that legal statements are justified if the audience is convinced in an argumentative dialogue. The formalized and implemented model DiaLaw guards the procedure in which two players aim at justifying statements.;DiaLaw shows the advances and problems linked to procedural models of legal justification. Moreover, an instructive discussion of the different models of procedural justification is provided.;It is stressed that in legal justification not only logically compelling arguments should be considered, but also convincing arguments. Therefore DiaLaw also deals with the rhetorical, psychological aspects of argument. This book is relevant for scholars in legal theory, artificial intelligence, and argumentation, and can be used in graduate courses on AI and law, and legal argumentation.
