With the recent release of Rationale 1.3, we also created a wiki for the Rationale community to create and share resources.

I’ve just uploaded a case study displaying some reasoning quite typical of the sort of argumentation conducted in small law firms.  In this case, the issue is whether tax is payable by the purchasors of a block of land. 

It is a useful case study because it illustrates many aspects of Rationale-style argument mapping all in a single map. 


What also struck me about it – and the reason for this post – is how such mapping can reveal the true complexity of even the most commonplace instances of legal argumentation.

In this case, the inferential chain from the critical piece of supporting evidence (a quote from a tax office decision) to the ultimate conclusion has six steps, including a rebuttal of an objection to a supporting reason for the main argument…