Evaluating the use of abstract dialectical frameworks to represent case law

Abstract Dialetical Frameworks (ADFs) are a recent development in computational argumentation which are, it has been suggested, a fruitful way of implementing theories of case law expressed in terms of factors. In this paper we evaluate this proposal, by representing the CATO analysis using ADFs. We evaluate the ease of implementation, the efficacy of the resulting program, ease of refinement of the program, transparency of the reasoning, relation to formal argumentation techniques, and transferability across domains.