Legal-Domain Expert

AKA: Law Expert, Legal Authority.
Context:
- They can (typically) possess Expert Legal Knowledge, such as of statutory requirements.
- They can provide Expert Legal Opinions and Expert Legal Analysis.
- They can contribute to Legal Research and Legal Scholarship.
- They can be involved in Legal Education.
- They can help shape Legal Policy and Legal Reform.
- ...
Example(s):
- A Certified Legal Practitioner.
- A Criminal Law Expert, who specializes in the area of Criminal Law.
- A Corporate Law Expert, knowledgeable in Business Law and Corporate Governance.
- A Constitutional Law Expert, adept in interpreting and applying the Constitution.
- A Human Rights Lawyer, focused on Human Rights Law and advocacy.
- A Legal Theorist, contributing to the theoretical aspects of Jurisprudence.
- ...
Counter-Example(s):
- A Legal Assistant or Paralegal, who assists in legal work but lacks the extensive knowledge and qualifications of a legal expert.
- A Non-Expert Legal Consultant, who provides legal advice without expert legal knowledge..
See: Legal System, Rule of Law, Legal Ethics, Law Practice, Legal Framework.

References

(Leith, 2016) ⇒ Philip Leith. (2016). “The Rise and Fall of the Legal Expert System”. In: International Review of Law, Computers & Technology. Taylor & Francis.
- QUOTE: Those very few of us who were critical of the rise of legal expert systems in the early 1980s probably wonder, in idle moments, whether there is a possibility of rejuvenation of an approach which was once multi-various and is now obscure and esoteric. Is it possible that after rising and falling, that legal expert system research programme could rise again? What were the conditions which gave impetus to the field and could they be repeated? In this article I want to return, with a personal viewpoint, on the rise of expert systems and why - despite their failure - the appeal of commoditising legal expertise continues to allure the unwary.

(Bench-Capon, 2012) ⇒ Trevor J.M. Bench-Capon. (2012). “What Makes a System a Legal Expert?”. In: JURIX.
- QUOTE: Since the 1980s, AI and Law has attempted to capture legal expertise in computer programs. But what is this expertise? This paper reviews a number of approaches, from the 1980s to the present day, which represent different answers to this question. It argues that our notion, and understanding, of expertise has developed and improved over the decades. As yet, however, only a few rather specific aspects have been addressed in detail, in particular the move from intermediate predicates to legal consequences, and the distinguishing of precedents. Much more, including the moves from evidence to facts and from facts to intermediate predicates, awaits exploration.