# Vercy AI instruction - YAML 1.2 (JSON-compatible) { "vercy": "1.0-draft", "publication": { "status": "published", "adjudicationStatus": "reviewable-draft", "publishableCanonical": false, "generatedAt": "2026-09-06T03:13:47Z", "synthesisSha256": "aa86c538461784b11bfd9946e40f4542447190aa3463ad8491463f14717ee8db", "providerMode": "single-provider-waiver", "providers": [ "Codex" ], "waivedProviders": [ "Claude", "Grok" ] }, "metaModel": { "id": "WM-POL-009", "registryId": "vr.wm-pol-009", "name": "Court / Arbitration Case", "version": "0.3.0-research.1", "previousVersions": [], "entryKind": "aggregate", "family": "World Models", "category": "Society, people and institutions", "industry": [ "Cross-industry" ], "domain": [ "SOC.POL.CSE" ], "tags": [ "court", "arbitration", "case", "soc.pol.cse" ], "status": "published" }, "canonicalUrl": "https://ver.cy/models/wm-pol-009-court-arbitration-case/", "sourceUrl": "https://github.com/ver-cy/world-models/tree/feat/mega-model-registry/research/runs/wm-pol-009", "model": { "registry_id": "vr.wm-pol-009", "model_id": "WM-POL-009", "name": "Court / Arbitration Case", "entry_kind": "aggregate", "purpose": "Represent a governed court, tribunal or arbitration proceeding with authoritative docket identity, procedural history and child legal records independent of storage and interface format.", "scope_statement": "Owns case identity, forum assignment, jurisdiction basis, dispute and claim references, procedural-party roles, docket events, schedules, hearings, procedural rulings, child filing, evidence and decision membership, remedy and review references, access views and closure. Forum, party, claim, filing content, evidence lifecycle, judgment content, remedy performance, appeal and enforcement masters remain external or child models.", "in_scope": [ "Docket identity, court or arbitration profile, forum assignment, jurisdiction, seat, parties, claims and procedural roles", "Docket events, service, deadlines, hearings, evidence-use rulings, procedural orders and safeguards", "Judgment-child links, remedies, finality, review and enforcement references, access, retention, interoperability and safe operations" ], "out_of_scope": [ "Forum organization, party identity, lawyer engagement, underlying contract, offense, asset or event masters", "WM-POL-019 filing content, WM-POL-020 evidence lifecycle, WM-POL-021 judgment content, remedy execution and enforcement case masters", "Automated adjudication, legal advice, outcome prediction or universal procedural law" ], "boundary_notes": [ { "neighbor": "Court, Tribunal or Arbitral Institution", "distinction": "The forum is an external organization with competence; the case is one proceeding in its docket or administration.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ] }, { "neighbor": "Legal Filing / Pleading", "distinction": "WM-POL-019 owns each procedural submission; the case composes its identifier, role, receipt and docket relation.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001" ] }, { "neighbor": "Evidence Item / Exhibit", "distinction": "WM-POL-020 owns evidence identity, custody and integrity; the case records submission, admission, exclusion, weight and use.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-008" ] }, { "neighbor": "Judgment / Legal Decision", "distinction": "WM-POL-021 owns decision text and identity; the case records membership, outcome, finality and review links.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-003" ] }, { "neighbor": "Enforcement and Remedy", "distinction": "A case may order or reference remedies, but recognition, enforcement, performance and satisfaction have separate authority and lifecycles.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ] } ] }, "sources": [ { "id": "SRC-001", "title": "Akoma Ntoso Version 1.0, Part 1: XML Vocabulary", "organization": "OASIS", "url": "https://docs.oasis-open.org/legaldocml/akn-core/v1.0/os/part1-vocabulary/akn-core-v1.0-os-part1-vocabulary.html", "version_or_date": "OASIS Standard, 29 August 2018", "source_type": "standard", "primary_source": true, "authority_tier": 1, "accessed_at": "2026-09-06T03:12:00Z", "relevance": "Defines structured legal and judicial documents, metadata, references, events, roles, analysis and judgment components." }, { "id": "SRC-002", "title": "LegalRuleML Core Specification Version 1.0", "organization": "OASIS", "url": "https://docs.oasis-open.org/legalruleml/legalruleml-core-spec/v1.0/os/legalruleml-core-spec-v1.0-os.html", "version_or_date": "OASIS Standard, 30 August 2021", "source_type": "standard", "primary_source": true, "authority_tier": 1, "accessed_at": "2026-09-06T03:12:00Z", "relevance": "Defines legal sources, authority, jurisdiction, temporal characteristics and formal legal assertions while preserving source linkage." }, { "id": "SRC-003", "title": "Council Conclusions on the European Case Law Identifier and minimum uniform metadata", "organization": "Council of the European Union", "url": "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52019XG1024%2801%29", "version_or_date": "2019/C 360/01, 24 October 2019", "source_type": "legislation", "primary_source": true, "authority_tier": 1, "accessed_at": "2026-09-06T03:12:00Z", "relevance": "Defines ECLI governance and case-law metadata for identifying, citing, publishing and finding judicial decisions across decentralized repositories." }, { "id": "SRC-004", "title": "UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules", "organization": "United Nations Commission on International Trade Law", "url": "https://uncitral.un.org/en/texts/arbitration/contractualtexts/arbitration", "version_or_date": "Rules through 2021 expedited provisions", "source_type": "standard", "primary_source": true, "authority_tier": 1, "accessed_at": "2026-09-06T03:12:00Z", "relevance": "Covers arbitration agreement, notices, tribunal constitution, procedure, evidence, hearings, interim measures, awards, interpretation and costs." }, { "id": "SRC-005", "title": "UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration", "organization": "United Nations Commission on International Trade Law", "url": "https://uncitral.un.org/en/texts/arbitration/modellaw/commercial_arbitration", "version_or_date": "1985 with amendments adopted in 2006", "source_type": "legislation", "primary_source": true, "authority_tier": 1, "accessed_at": "2026-09-06T03:12:00Z", "relevance": "Covers arbitration agreement, tribunal composition and jurisdiction, court intervention, interim measures, procedure, awards, set-aside, recognition and enforcement." }, { "id": "SRC-006", "title": "Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters", "organization": "Hague Conference on Private International Law", "url": "https://www.hcch.net/en/instruments/conventions/full-text/?cid=137", "version_or_date": "HCCH 2019 Judgments Convention", "source_type": "legislation", "primary_source": true, "authority_tier": 1, "accessed_at": "2026-09-06T03:12:00Z", "relevance": "Provides conditions and refusal grounds for recognition and enforcement of judgments across Contracting States, relevant to external post-decision processes." }, { "id": "SRC-007", "title": "Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents", "organization": "Hague Conference on Private International Law", "url": "https://www.hcch.net/en/instruments/conventions/full-text/?cid=17", "version_or_date": "HCCH 1965 Service Convention", "source_type": "legislation", "primary_source": true, "authority_tier": 1, "accessed_at": "2026-09-06T03:12:00Z", "relevance": "Provides cross-border service channels and certificates, supporting attributable service events without defining universal domestic procedure." }, { "id": "SRC-008", "title": "PROV-O: The PROV Ontology", "organization": "World Wide Web Consortium", "url": "https://www.w3.org/TR/prov-o/", "version_or_date": "W3C Recommendation, 30 April 2013", "source_type": "ontology", "primary_source": true, "authority_tier": 1, "accessed_at": "2026-09-06T03:12:00Z", "relevance": "Provides provenance for case revisions, filings, evidence use, hearings, orders, decisions and responsible agents." }, { "id": "SRC-009", "title": "Time Ontology in OWL", "organization": "World Wide Web Consortium", "url": "https://www.w3.org/TR/owl-time/", "version_or_date": "W3C Candidate Recommendation Draft, 15 November 2022", "source_type": "ontology", "primary_source": true, "authority_tier": 1, "accessed_at": "2026-09-06T03:12:00Z", "relevance": "Provides instants, intervals and temporal relations for deadlines, hearings, orders, decision effect and knowledge time." }, { "id": "SRC-010", "title": "Date and Time on the Internet: Timestamps", "organization": "Internet Engineering Task Force", "url": "https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3339", "version_or_date": "RFC 3339, July 2002", "source_type": "standard", "primary_source": true, "authority_tier": 1, "accessed_at": "2026-09-06T03:12:00Z", "relevance": "Defines timestamps with seconds and explicit UTC relation for filing, service, hearing, decision, publication and audit events." } ], "structure": { "bundles": [ { "id": "case-identity-forum-and-procedure-profile", "name": "Case identity, forum and procedure profile", "description": "Identifies one proceeding in its authoritative docket and pins the forum, jurisdiction and applicable procedure.", "rationale": "The case is not the forum, dispute, decision or enforcement action, and court and arbitration profiles differ materially.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ], "layers": [ { "id": "docket-identity-class-and-master-register", "name": "Docket identity, class and master register", "description": "Stable case identity and jurisdiction-qualified classification.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ], "findings": [ { "id": "case-identifier-docket-register-alias-and-consolidation", "name": "Case identifier, docket register, alias and consolidation", "description": "Master case identifier, namespace, docket, aliases, joined or severed case links, resolver, version and collision state.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ], "questions": [ { "id": "case-identifier-docket-register-alias-and-consolidation-q01", "text": "What exact identities, roles, classes, values, links and unknowns define case identifier, docket register, alias and consolidation for this case?", "kind": "identity", "answer_data": [ "identities and roles", "class and profile", "values and links", "unknowns" ] }, { "id": "case-identifier-docket-register-alias-and-consolidation-q02", "text": "Which forum authority, procedural rule, filing, evidence, order and event or knowledge time supports case identifier, docket register, alias and consolidation?", "kind": "evidence", "answer_data": [ "forum and authority", "rule", "record or evidence", "order", "times" ] }, { "id": "case-identifier-docket-register-alias-and-consolidation-q03", "text": "How may case identifier, docket register, alias and consolidation be validated, contested, corrected, superseded, retained or disclosed without adjudicating the dispute or erasing history?", "kind": "validation", "answer_data": [ "validation", "contest route", "non-adjudication", "successor", "retention and access" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "case-identifier-docket-register-alias-and-consolidation-data", "name": "Case identifier, docket register, alias and consolidation data", "description": "Structured forum-qualified case data for case identifier, docket register, alias and consolidation.", "value_kind": "identifier", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "case-identifier-docket-register-alias-and-consolidation-record", "name": "Case identifier, docket register, alias and consolidation record", "description": "Versioned evidence-bearing case record for case identifier, docket register, alias and consolidation with rule, event and knowledge time, provenance and access marking.", "media_or_form": [ "logical court or arbitration case record", "authoritative docket or procedural evidence reference" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Case identifier plus case-identifier-docket-register-alias-and-consolidation assertion or event identifier; party, title, forum, date and hash never identify the case alone.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null }, { "id": "court-tribunal-arbitration-stage-track-and-procedure-class", "name": "Court, tribunal, arbitration, stage, track and procedure class", "description": "Forum-kind profile, matter class, instance, track, expedited status, procedure rules and classification versions.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ], "questions": [ { "id": "court-tribunal-arbitration-stage-track-and-procedure-class-q01", "text": "What exact identities, roles, classes, values, links and unknowns define court, tribunal, arbitration, stage, track and procedure class for this case?", "kind": "classification", "answer_data": [ "identities and roles", "class and profile", "values and links", "unknowns" ] }, { "id": "court-tribunal-arbitration-stage-track-and-procedure-class-q02", "text": "Which forum authority, procedural rule, filing, evidence, order and event or knowledge time supports court, tribunal, arbitration, stage, track and procedure class?", "kind": "evidence", "answer_data": [ "forum and authority", "rule", "record or evidence", "order", "times" ] }, { "id": "court-tribunal-arbitration-stage-track-and-procedure-class-q03", "text": "How may court, tribunal, arbitration, stage, track and procedure class be validated, contested, corrected, superseded, retained or disclosed without adjudicating the dispute or erasing history?", "kind": "validation", "answer_data": [ "validation", "contest route", "non-adjudication", "successor", "retention and access" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "court-tribunal-arbitration-stage-track-and-procedure-class-data", "name": "Court, tribunal, arbitration, stage, track and procedure class data", "description": "Structured forum-qualified case data for court, tribunal, arbitration, stage, track and procedure class.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "court-tribunal-arbitration-stage-track-and-procedure-class-record", "name": "Court, tribunal, arbitration, stage, track and procedure class record", "description": "Versioned evidence-bearing case record for court, tribunal, arbitration, stage, track and procedure class with rule, event and knowledge time, provenance and access marking.", "media_or_form": [ "logical court or arbitration case record", "authoritative docket or procedural evidence reference" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Case identifier plus court-tribunal-arbitration-stage-track-and-procedure-class assertion or event identifier; party, title, forum, date and hash never identify the case alone.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] }, { "id": "forum-assignment-jurisdiction-seat-and-competence", "name": "Forum assignment, jurisdiction, seat and competence", "description": "References the deciding body and the asserted basis for competence.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ], "findings": [ { "id": "forum-organization-chamber-panel-judge-arbitrator-and-clerk-reference", "name": "Forum organization, chamber, panel, judge, arbitrator and clerk reference", "description": "External organization and person references, procedural roles, appointment, assignment, recusal and valid intervals.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ], "questions": [ { "id": "forum-organization-chamber-panel-judge-arbitrator-and-clerk-reference-q01", "text": "What exact identities, roles, classes, values, links and unknowns define forum organization, chamber, panel, judge, arbitrator and clerk reference for this case?", "kind": "relationship", "answer_data": [ "identities and roles", "class and profile", "values and links", "unknowns" ] }, { "id": "forum-organization-chamber-panel-judge-arbitrator-and-clerk-reference-q02", "text": "Which forum authority, procedural rule, filing, evidence, order and event or knowledge time supports forum organization, chamber, panel, judge, arbitrator and clerk reference?", "kind": "evidence", "answer_data": [ "forum and authority", "rule", "record or evidence", "order", "times" ] }, { "id": "forum-organization-chamber-panel-judge-arbitrator-and-clerk-reference-q03", "text": "How may forum organization, chamber, panel, judge, arbitrator and clerk reference be validated, contested, corrected, superseded, retained or disclosed without adjudicating the dispute or erasing history?", "kind": "validation", "answer_data": [ "validation", "contest route", "non-adjudication", "successor", "retention and access" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "forum-organization-chamber-panel-judge-arbitrator-and-clerk-reference-data", "name": "Forum organization, chamber, panel, judge, arbitrator and clerk reference data", "description": "Structured forum-qualified case data for forum organization, chamber, panel, judge, arbitrator and clerk reference.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "forum-organization-chamber-panel-judge-arbitrator-and-clerk-reference-record", "name": "Forum organization, chamber, panel, judge, arbitrator and clerk reference record", "description": "Versioned evidence-bearing case record for forum organization, chamber, panel, judge, arbitrator and clerk reference with rule, event and knowledge time, provenance and access marking.", "media_or_form": [ "logical court or arbitration case record", "authoritative docket or procedural evidence reference" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Case identifier plus forum-organization-chamber-panel-judge-arbitrator-and-clerk-reference assertion or event identifier; party, title, forum, date and hash never identify the case alone.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null }, { "id": "subject-personal-territorial-jurisdiction-seat-venue-and-referral-basis", "name": "Subject, personal and territorial jurisdiction, seat, venue and referral basis", "description": "Jurisdiction assertions, arbitration agreement or referral, seat, venue, competence decision, challenge and applicable procedure.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ], "questions": [ { "id": "subject-personal-territorial-jurisdiction-seat-venue-and-referral-basis-q01", "text": "What exact identities, roles, classes, values, links and unknowns define subject, personal and territorial jurisdiction, seat, venue and referral basis for this case?", "kind": "authority", "answer_data": [ "identities and roles", "class and profile", "values and links", "unknowns" ] }, { "id": "subject-personal-territorial-jurisdiction-seat-venue-and-referral-basis-q02", "text": "Which forum authority, procedural rule, filing, evidence, order and event or knowledge time supports subject, personal and territorial jurisdiction, seat, venue and referral basis?", "kind": "evidence", "answer_data": [ "forum and authority", "rule", "record or evidence", "order", "times" ] }, { "id": "subject-personal-territorial-jurisdiction-seat-venue-and-referral-basis-q03", "text": "How may subject, personal and territorial jurisdiction, seat, venue and referral basis be validated, contested, corrected, superseded, retained or disclosed without adjudicating the dispute or erasing history?", "kind": "validation", "answer_data": [ "validation", "contest route", "non-adjudication", "successor", "retention and access" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "subject-personal-territorial-jurisdiction-seat-venue-and-referral-basis-data", "name": "Subject, personal and territorial jurisdiction, seat, venue and referral basis data", "description": "Structured forum-qualified case data for subject, personal and territorial jurisdiction, seat, venue and referral basis.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "subject-personal-territorial-jurisdiction-seat-venue-and-referral-basis-record", "name": "Subject, personal and territorial jurisdiction, seat, venue and referral basis record", "description": "Versioned evidence-bearing case record for subject, personal and territorial jurisdiction, seat, venue and referral basis with rule, event and knowledge time, provenance and access marking.", "media_or_form": [ "logical court or arbitration case record", "authoritative docket or procedural evidence reference" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Case identifier plus subject-personal-territorial-jurisdiction-seat-venue-and-referral-basis assertion or event identifier; party, title, forum, date and hash never identify the case alone.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] } ] }, { "id": "dispute-claims-parties-and-representation", "name": "Dispute, claims, parties and representation", "description": "Defines what is contested and records procedural roles without importing party, contract, offense or claim masters.", "rationale": "A party can hold several roles and claims can change, split, settle or be dismissed without changing underlying identities.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-004", "SRC-005", "SRC-008" ], "layers": [ { "id": "dispute-claim-counterclaim-defense-and-issues", "name": "Dispute, claim, counterclaim, defense and issues", "description": "References asserted causes, relief and contested questions.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ], "findings": [ { "id": "underlying-dispute-contract-offense-event-and-subject-reference", "name": "Underlying dispute, contract, offense, event and subject reference", "description": "External matter identifiers, relationship to the case, jurisdiction, factual scope, value and non-inference boundaries.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ], "questions": [ { "id": "underlying-dispute-contract-offense-event-and-subject-reference-q01", "text": "What exact identities, roles, classes, values, links and unknowns define underlying dispute, contract, offense, event and subject reference for this case?", "kind": "relationship", "answer_data": [ "identities and roles", "class and profile", "values and links", "unknowns" ] }, { "id": "underlying-dispute-contract-offense-event-and-subject-reference-q02", "text": "Which forum authority, procedural rule, filing, evidence, order and event or knowledge time supports underlying dispute, contract, offense, event and subject reference?", "kind": "evidence", "answer_data": [ "forum and authority", "rule", "record or evidence", "order", "times" ] }, { "id": "underlying-dispute-contract-offense-event-and-subject-reference-q03", "text": "How may underlying dispute, contract, offense, event and subject reference be validated, contested, corrected, superseded, retained or disclosed without adjudicating the dispute or erasing history?", "kind": "validation", "answer_data": [ "validation", "contest route", "non-adjudication", "successor", "retention and access" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "underlying-dispute-contract-offense-event-and-subject-reference-data", "name": "Underlying dispute, contract, offense, event and subject reference data", "description": "Structured forum-qualified case data for underlying dispute, contract, offense, event and subject reference.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "underlying-dispute-contract-offense-event-and-subject-reference-record", "name": "Underlying dispute, contract, offense, event and subject reference record", "description": "Versioned evidence-bearing case record for underlying dispute, contract, offense, event and subject reference with rule, event and knowledge time, provenance and access marking.", "media_or_form": [ "logical court or arbitration case record", "authoritative docket or procedural evidence reference" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Case identifier plus underlying-dispute-contract-offense-event-and-subject-reference assertion or event identifier; party, title, forum, date and hash never identify the case alone.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null }, { "id": "claim-counterclaim-defense-issue-relief-and-controversy-state", "name": "Claim, counterclaim, defense, issue, relief and controversy state", "description": "Claim reference, proponent, respondent, legal and factual basis, requested relief, amount, status, disposition and dependencies.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-004" ], "questions": [ { "id": "claim-counterclaim-defense-issue-relief-and-controversy-state-q01", "text": "What exact identities, roles, classes, values, links and unknowns define claim, counterclaim, defense, issue, relief and controversy state for this case?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identities and roles", "class and profile", "values and links", "unknowns" ] }, { "id": "claim-counterclaim-defense-issue-relief-and-controversy-state-q02", "text": "Which forum authority, procedural rule, filing, evidence, order and event or knowledge time supports claim, counterclaim, defense, issue, relief and controversy state?", "kind": "evidence", "answer_data": [ "forum and authority", "rule", "record or evidence", "order", "times" ] }, { "id": "claim-counterclaim-defense-issue-relief-and-controversy-state-q03", "text": "How may claim, counterclaim, defense, issue, relief and controversy state be validated, contested, corrected, superseded, retained or disclosed without adjudicating the dispute or erasing history?", "kind": "validation", "answer_data": [ "validation", "contest route", "non-adjudication", "successor", "retention and access" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "claim-counterclaim-defense-issue-relief-and-controversy-state-data", "name": "Claim, counterclaim, defense, issue, relief and controversy state data", "description": "Structured forum-qualified case data for claim, counterclaim, defense, issue, relief and controversy state.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-004" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "claim-counterclaim-defense-issue-relief-and-controversy-state-record", "name": "Claim, counterclaim, defense, issue, relief and controversy state record", "description": "Versioned evidence-bearing case record for claim, counterclaim, defense, issue, relief and controversy state with rule, event and knowledge time, provenance and access marking.", "media_or_form": [ "logical court or arbitration case record", "authoritative docket or procedural evidence reference" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Case identifier plus claim-counterclaim-defense-issue-relief-and-controversy-state assertion or event identifier; party, title, forum, date and hash never identify the case alone.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-004" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] }, { "id": "party-role-standing-capacity-and-representation", "name": "Party role, standing, capacity and representation", "description": "Records case-specific participation and authority.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005", "SRC-008" ], "findings": [ { "id": "claimant-respondent-appellant-intervenor-witness-and-other-role", "name": "Claimant, respondent, appellant, intervenor, witness and other role", "description": "External party reference, procedural role, side, capacity, standing assertion, confidentiality class and interval.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ], "questions": [ { "id": "claimant-respondent-appellant-intervenor-witness-and-other-role-q01", "text": "What exact identities, roles, classes, values, links and unknowns define claimant, respondent, appellant, intervenor, witness and other role for this case?", "kind": "relationship", "answer_data": [ "identities and roles", "class and profile", "values and links", "unknowns" ] }, { "id": "claimant-respondent-appellant-intervenor-witness-and-other-role-q02", "text": "Which forum authority, procedural rule, filing, evidence, order and event or knowledge time supports claimant, respondent, appellant, intervenor, witness and other role?", "kind": "evidence", "answer_data": [ "forum and authority", "rule", "record or evidence", "order", "times" ] }, { "id": "claimant-respondent-appellant-intervenor-witness-and-other-role-q03", "text": "How may claimant, respondent, appellant, intervenor, witness and other role be validated, contested, corrected, superseded, retained or disclosed without adjudicating the dispute or erasing history?", "kind": "validation", "answer_data": [ "validation", "contest route", "non-adjudication", "successor", "retention and access" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "claimant-respondent-appellant-intervenor-witness-and-other-role-data", "name": "Claimant, respondent, appellant, intervenor, witness and other role data", "description": "Structured forum-qualified case data for claimant, respondent, appellant, intervenor, witness and other role.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "claimant-respondent-appellant-intervenor-witness-and-other-role-record", "name": "Claimant, respondent, appellant, intervenor, witness and other role record", "description": "Versioned evidence-bearing case record for claimant, respondent, appellant, intervenor, witness and other role with rule, event and knowledge time, provenance and access marking.", "media_or_form": [ "logical court or arbitration case record", "authoritative docket or procedural evidence reference" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Case identifier plus claimant-respondent-appellant-intervenor-witness-and-other-role assertion or event identifier; party, title, forum, date and hash never identify the case alone.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null }, { "id": "representative-counsel-mandate-legal-aid-notice-and-conflict", "name": "Representative, counsel, mandate, legal aid, notice and conflict", "description": "External representative, engagement or authority reference, scope, service address, legal aid, conflicts and termination.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-008" ], "questions": [ { "id": "representative-counsel-mandate-legal-aid-notice-and-conflict-q01", "text": "What exact identities, roles, classes, values, links and unknowns define representative, counsel, mandate, legal aid, notice and conflict for this case?", "kind": "authority", "answer_data": [ "identities and roles", "class and profile", "values and links", "unknowns" ] }, { "id": "representative-counsel-mandate-legal-aid-notice-and-conflict-q02", "text": "Which forum authority, procedural rule, filing, evidence, order and event or knowledge time supports representative, counsel, mandate, legal aid, notice and conflict?", "kind": "evidence", "answer_data": [ "forum and authority", "rule", "record or evidence", "order", "times" ] }, { "id": "representative-counsel-mandate-legal-aid-notice-and-conflict-q03", "text": "How may representative, counsel, mandate, legal aid, notice and conflict be validated, contested, corrected, superseded, retained or disclosed without adjudicating the dispute or erasing history?", "kind": "validation", "answer_data": [ "validation", "contest route", "non-adjudication", "successor", "retention and access" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "representative-counsel-mandate-legal-aid-notice-and-conflict-data", "name": "Representative, counsel, mandate, legal aid, notice and conflict data", "description": "Structured forum-qualified case data for representative, counsel, mandate, legal aid, notice and conflict.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-008" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "representative-counsel-mandate-legal-aid-notice-and-conflict-record", "name": "Representative, counsel, mandate, legal aid, notice and conflict record", "description": "Versioned evidence-bearing case record for representative, counsel, mandate, legal aid, notice and conflict with rule, event and knowledge time, provenance and access marking.", "media_or_form": [ "logical court or arbitration case record", "authoritative docket or procedural evidence reference" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Case identifier plus representative-counsel-mandate-legal-aid-notice-and-conflict assertion or event identifier; party, title, forum, date and hash never identify the case alone.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-008" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] } ] }, { "id": "docket-filings-service-schedule-and-hearings", "name": "Docket, filings, service, schedule and hearings", "description": "Orders procedural events and composes child filings while preserving cross-border service and deadline evidence.", "rationale": "A filed document, successful transmission and legally effective service are distinct assertions that can have different times.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-004", "SRC-005", "SRC-007", "SRC-009", "SRC-010" ], "layers": [ { "id": "docket-events-filings-motions-and-service", "name": "Docket events, filings, motions and service", "description": "Maintains append-only procedural history and child-record membership.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-004", "SRC-007", "SRC-010" ], "findings": [ { "id": "filing-pleading-motion-notice-order-and-child-membership", "name": "Filing, pleading, motion, notice, order and child membership", "description": "WM-POL-019 child identifiers, filing kind, submitter role, target issue, receipt, acceptance, seal, confidentiality and supersession.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-004" ], "questions": [ { "id": "filing-pleading-motion-notice-order-and-child-membership-q01", "text": "What exact identities, roles, classes, values, links and unknowns define filing, pleading, motion, notice, order and child membership for this case?", "kind": "composition", "answer_data": [ "identities and roles", "class and profile", "values and links", "unknowns" ] }, { "id": "filing-pleading-motion-notice-order-and-child-membership-q02", "text": "Which forum authority, procedural rule, filing, evidence, order and event or knowledge time supports filing, pleading, motion, notice, order and child membership?", "kind": "evidence", "answer_data": [ "forum and authority", "rule", "record or evidence", "order", "times" ] }, { "id": "filing-pleading-motion-notice-order-and-child-membership-q03", "text": "How may filing, pleading, motion, notice, order and child membership be validated, contested, corrected, superseded, retained or disclosed without adjudicating the dispute or erasing history?", "kind": "validation", "answer_data": [ "validation", "contest route", "non-adjudication", "successor", "retention and access" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "filing-pleading-motion-notice-order-and-child-membership-data", "name": "Filing, pleading, motion, notice, order and child membership data", "description": "Structured forum-qualified case data for filing, pleading, motion, notice, order and child membership.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-004" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "filing-pleading-motion-notice-order-and-child-membership-record", "name": "Filing, pleading, motion, notice, order and child membership record", "description": "Versioned evidence-bearing case record for filing, pleading, motion, notice, order and child membership with rule, event and knowledge time, provenance and access marking.", "media_or_form": [ "logical court or arbitration case record", "authoritative docket or procedural evidence reference" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Case identifier plus filing-pleading-motion-notice-order-and-child-membership assertion or event identifier; party, title, forum, date and hash never identify the case alone.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-004" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null }, { "id": "service-method-recipient-address-certificate-effective-time-and-contest", "name": "Service method, recipient, address, certificate, effective time and contest", "description": "Transmission channel, serving authority, recipient, address, delivery evidence, legal-effect rule, failure and challenge.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-007", "SRC-010" ], "questions": [ { "id": "service-method-recipient-address-certificate-effective-time-and-contest-q01", "text": "What exact identities, roles, classes, values, links and unknowns define service method, recipient, address, certificate, effective time and contest for this case?", "kind": "evidence", "answer_data": [ "identities and roles", "class and profile", "values and links", "unknowns" ] }, { "id": "service-method-recipient-address-certificate-effective-time-and-contest-q02", "text": "Which forum authority, procedural rule, filing, evidence, order and event or knowledge time supports service method, recipient, address, certificate, effective time and contest?", "kind": "evidence", "answer_data": [ "forum and authority", "rule", "record or evidence", "order", "times" ] }, { "id": "service-method-recipient-address-certificate-effective-time-and-contest-q03", "text": "How may service method, recipient, address, certificate, effective time and contest be validated, contested, corrected, superseded, retained or disclosed without adjudicating the dispute or erasing history?", "kind": "validation", "answer_data": [ "validation", "contest route", "non-adjudication", "successor", "retention and access" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "service-method-recipient-address-certificate-effective-time-and-contest-data", "name": "Service method, recipient, address, certificate, effective time and contest data", "description": "Structured forum-qualified case data for service method, recipient, address, certificate, effective time and contest.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-007", "SRC-010" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "service-method-recipient-address-certificate-effective-time-and-contest-record", "name": "Service method, recipient, address, certificate, effective time and contest record", "description": "Versioned evidence-bearing case record for service method, recipient, address, certificate, effective time and contest with rule, event and knowledge time, provenance and access marking.", "media_or_form": [ "logical court or arbitration case record", "authoritative docket or procedural evidence reference" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Case identifier plus service-method-recipient-address-certificate-effective-time-and-contest assertion or event identifier; party, title, forum, date and hash never identify the case alone.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-007", "SRC-010" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] }, { "id": "deadlines-calendar-hearings-and-participation", "name": "Deadlines, calendar, hearings and participation", "description": "Represents scheduled and actual procedural time with attendance and accessibility.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005", "SRC-009", "SRC-010" ], "findings": [ { "id": "deadline-trigger-calculation-extension-stay-default-and-compliance", "name": "Deadline, trigger, calculation, extension, stay, default and compliance", "description": "Rule source, trigger event, computed due time, calendar, timezone, extension, stay, filing event, lateness and excusal.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-009", "SRC-010" ], "questions": [ { "id": "deadline-trigger-calculation-extension-stay-default-and-compliance-q01", "text": "What exact identities, roles, classes, values, links and unknowns define deadline, trigger, calculation, extension, stay, default and compliance for this case?", "kind": "temporal", "answer_data": [ "identities and roles", "class and profile", "values and links", "unknowns" ] }, { "id": "deadline-trigger-calculation-extension-stay-default-and-compliance-q02", "text": "Which forum authority, procedural rule, filing, evidence, order and event or knowledge time supports deadline, trigger, calculation, extension, stay, default and compliance?", "kind": "evidence", "answer_data": [ "forum and authority", "rule", "record or evidence", "order", "times" ] }, { "id": "deadline-trigger-calculation-extension-stay-default-and-compliance-q03", "text": "How may deadline, trigger, calculation, extension, stay, default and compliance be validated, contested, corrected, superseded, retained or disclosed without adjudicating the dispute or erasing history?", "kind": "validation", "answer_data": [ "validation", "contest route", "non-adjudication", "successor", "retention and access" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "deadline-trigger-calculation-extension-stay-default-and-compliance-data", "name": "Deadline, trigger, calculation, extension, stay, default and compliance data", "description": "Structured forum-qualified case data for deadline, trigger, calculation, extension, stay, default and compliance.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-009", "SRC-010" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "deadline-trigger-calculation-extension-stay-default-and-compliance-record", "name": "Deadline, trigger, calculation, extension, stay, default and compliance record", "description": "Versioned evidence-bearing case record for deadline, trigger, calculation, extension, stay, default and compliance with rule, event and knowledge time, provenance and access marking.", "media_or_form": [ "logical court or arbitration case record", "authoritative docket or procedural evidence reference" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Case identifier plus deadline-trigger-calculation-extension-stay-default-and-compliance assertion or event identifier; party, title, forum, date and hash never identify the case alone.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-009", "SRC-010" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null }, { "id": "hearing-session-location-mode-participants-record-and-outcome", "name": "Hearing, session, location, mode, participants, record and outcome", "description": "Scheduled and actual times, physical or remote venue, panel, attendance, interpretation, accessibility, transcript and procedural outcome.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005", "SRC-009" ], "questions": [ { "id": "hearing-session-location-mode-participants-record-and-outcome-q01", "text": "What exact identities, roles, classes, values, links and unknowns define hearing, session, location, mode, participants, record and outcome for this case?", "kind": "event", "answer_data": [ "identities and roles", "class and profile", "values and links", "unknowns" ] }, { "id": "hearing-session-location-mode-participants-record-and-outcome-q02", "text": "Which forum authority, procedural rule, filing, evidence, order and event or knowledge time supports hearing, session, location, mode, participants, record and outcome?", "kind": "evidence", "answer_data": [ "forum and authority", "rule", "record or evidence", "order", "times" ] }, { "id": "hearing-session-location-mode-participants-record-and-outcome-q03", "text": "How may hearing, session, location, mode, participants, record and outcome be validated, contested, corrected, superseded, retained or disclosed without adjudicating the dispute or erasing history?", "kind": "validation", "answer_data": [ "validation", "contest route", "non-adjudication", "successor", "retention and access" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "hearing-session-location-mode-participants-record-and-outcome-data", "name": "Hearing, session, location, mode, participants, record and outcome data", "description": "Structured forum-qualified case data for hearing, session, location, mode, participants, record and outcome.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005", "SRC-009" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "hearing-session-location-mode-participants-record-and-outcome-record", "name": "Hearing, session, location, mode, participants, record and outcome record", "description": "Versioned evidence-bearing case record for hearing, session, location, mode, participants, record and outcome with rule, event and knowledge time, provenance and access marking.", "media_or_form": [ "logical court or arbitration case record", "authoritative docket or procedural evidence reference" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Case identifier plus hearing-session-location-mode-participants-record-and-outcome assertion or event identifier; party, title, forum, date and hash never identify the case alone.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005", "SRC-009" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] } ] }, { "id": "evidence-findings-orders-and-procedural-safeguards", "name": "Evidence, findings, orders and procedural safeguards", "description": "Composes evidence-item references and records admission, weighing and procedural control without duplicating evidence or decision content.", "rationale": "Evidence admission, credibility and finding of fact are separate authority-qualified assertions; allegations remain allegations.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-004", "SRC-005", "SRC-008" ], "layers": [ { "id": "evidence-record-admission-custody-and-findings", "name": "Evidence record, admission, custody and findings", "description": "Links child evidence items to case-specific rulings and uses.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005", "SRC-008" ], "findings": [ { "id": "evidence-item-exhibit-submission-custody-and-child-membership", "name": "Evidence item, exhibit, submission, custody and child membership", "description": "WM-POL-020 child identifier, proponent, issue, submission event, custody reference, confidentiality, version and disposition.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-008" ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-item-exhibit-submission-custody-and-child-membership-q01", "text": "What exact identities, roles, classes, values, links and unknowns define evidence item, exhibit, submission, custody and child membership for this case?", "kind": "composition", "answer_data": [ "identities and roles", "class and profile", "values and links", "unknowns" ] }, { "id": "evidence-item-exhibit-submission-custody-and-child-membership-q02", "text": "Which forum authority, procedural rule, filing, evidence, order and event or knowledge time supports evidence item, exhibit, submission, custody and child membership?", "kind": "evidence", "answer_data": [ "forum and authority", "rule", "record or evidence", "order", "times" ] }, { "id": "evidence-item-exhibit-submission-custody-and-child-membership-q03", "text": "How may evidence item, exhibit, submission, custody and child membership be validated, contested, corrected, superseded, retained or disclosed without adjudicating the dispute or erasing history?", "kind": "validation", "answer_data": [ "validation", "contest route", "non-adjudication", "successor", "retention and access" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "evidence-item-exhibit-submission-custody-and-child-membership-data", "name": "Evidence item, exhibit, submission, custody and child membership data", "description": "Structured forum-qualified case data for evidence item, exhibit, submission, custody and child membership.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-008" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "evidence-item-exhibit-submission-custody-and-child-membership-record", "name": "Evidence item, exhibit, submission, custody and child membership record", "description": "Versioned evidence-bearing case record for evidence item, exhibit, submission, custody and child membership with rule, event and knowledge time, provenance and access marking.", "media_or_form": [ "logical court or arbitration case record", "authoritative docket or procedural evidence reference" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Case identifier plus evidence-item-exhibit-submission-custody-and-child-membership assertion or event identifier; party, title, forum, date and hash never identify the case alone.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-008" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null }, { "id": "admission-exclusion-weight-credibility-finding-and-burden", "name": "Admission, exclusion, weight, credibility, finding and burden", "description": "Decision maker, rule, hearing context, ruling, weight, credibility, standard or burden, fact finding, reasons and challenge.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ], "questions": [ { "id": "admission-exclusion-weight-credibility-finding-and-burden-q01", "text": "What exact identities, roles, classes, values, links and unknowns define admission, exclusion, weight, credibility, finding and burden for this case?", "kind": "decision", "answer_data": [ "identities and roles", "class and profile", "values and links", "unknowns" ] }, { "id": "admission-exclusion-weight-credibility-finding-and-burden-q02", "text": "Which forum authority, procedural rule, filing, evidence, order and event or knowledge time supports admission, exclusion, weight, credibility, finding and burden?", "kind": "evidence", "answer_data": [ "forum and authority", "rule", "record or evidence", "order", "times" ] }, { "id": "admission-exclusion-weight-credibility-finding-and-burden-q03", "text": "How may admission, exclusion, weight, credibility, finding and burden be validated, contested, corrected, superseded, retained or disclosed without adjudicating the dispute or erasing history?", "kind": "validation", "answer_data": [ "validation", "contest route", "non-adjudication", "successor", "retention and access" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "admission-exclusion-weight-credibility-finding-and-burden-data", "name": "Admission, exclusion, weight, credibility, finding and burden data", "description": "Structured forum-qualified case data for admission, exclusion, weight, credibility, finding and burden.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "admission-exclusion-weight-credibility-finding-and-burden-record", "name": "Admission, exclusion, weight, credibility, finding and burden record", "description": "Versioned evidence-bearing case record for admission, exclusion, weight, credibility, finding and burden with rule, event and knowledge time, provenance and access marking.", "media_or_form": [ "logical court or arbitration case record", "authoritative docket or procedural evidence reference" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Case identifier plus admission-exclusion-weight-credibility-finding-and-burden assertion or event identifier; party, title, forum, date and hash never identify the case alone.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] }, { "id": "interim-procedural-orders-fairness-and-participation", "name": "Interim and procedural orders, fairness and participation", "description": "Records case-management control and safeguard assertions.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ], "findings": [ { "id": "interim-measure-procedural-order-injunction-security-and-cost-order", "name": "Interim measure, procedural order, injunction, security and cost order", "description": "Order reference, authority, affected parties, terms, issue and expiry time, reasons, security, challenge and compliance reference.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ], "questions": [ { "id": "interim-measure-procedural-order-injunction-security-and-cost-order-q01", "text": "What exact identities, roles, classes, values, links and unknowns define interim measure, procedural order, injunction, security and cost order for this case?", "kind": "decision", "answer_data": [ "identities and roles", "class and profile", "values and links", "unknowns" ] }, { "id": "interim-measure-procedural-order-injunction-security-and-cost-order-q02", "text": "Which forum authority, procedural rule, filing, evidence, order and event or knowledge time supports interim measure, procedural order, injunction, security and cost order?", "kind": "evidence", "answer_data": [ "forum and authority", "rule", "record or evidence", "order", "times" ] }, { "id": "interim-measure-procedural-order-injunction-security-and-cost-order-q03", "text": "How may interim measure, procedural order, injunction, security and cost order be validated, contested, corrected, superseded, retained or disclosed without adjudicating the dispute or erasing history?", "kind": "validation", "answer_data": [ "validation", "contest route", "non-adjudication", "successor", "retention and access" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "interim-measure-procedural-order-injunction-security-and-cost-order-data", "name": "Interim measure, procedural order, injunction, security and cost order data", "description": "Structured forum-qualified case data for interim measure, procedural order, injunction, security and cost order.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "interim-measure-procedural-order-injunction-security-and-cost-order-record", "name": "Interim measure, procedural order, injunction, security and cost order record", "description": "Versioned evidence-bearing case record for interim measure, procedural order, injunction, security and cost order with rule, event and knowledge time, provenance and access marking.", "media_or_form": [ "logical court or arbitration case record", "authoritative docket or procedural evidence reference" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Case identifier plus interim-measure-procedural-order-injunction-security-and-cost-order assertion or event identifier; party, title, forum, date and hash never identify the case alone.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null }, { "id": "notice-opportunity-to-be-heard-equality-impartiality-recusal-and-accommodation", "name": "Notice, opportunity to be heard, equality, impartiality, recusal and accommodation", "description": "Safeguard profile, party, required opportunity, actual event, panel conflict, recusal, accessibility response and contest.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ], "questions": [ { "id": "notice-opportunity-to-be-heard-equality-impartiality-recusal-and-accommodation-q01", "text": "What exact identities, roles, classes, values, links and unknowns define notice, opportunity to be heard, equality, impartiality, recusal and accommodation for this case?", "kind": "validation", "answer_data": [ "identities and roles", "class and profile", "values and links", "unknowns" ] }, { "id": "notice-opportunity-to-be-heard-equality-impartiality-recusal-and-accommodation-q02", "text": "Which forum authority, procedural rule, filing, evidence, order and event or knowledge time supports notice, opportunity to be heard, equality, impartiality, recusal and accommodation?", "kind": "evidence", "answer_data": [ "forum and authority", "rule", "record or evidence", "order", "times" ] }, { "id": "notice-opportunity-to-be-heard-equality-impartiality-recusal-and-accommodation-q03", "text": "How may notice, opportunity to be heard, equality, impartiality, recusal and accommodation be validated, contested, corrected, superseded, retained or disclosed without adjudicating the dispute or erasing history?", "kind": "validation", "answer_data": [ "validation", "contest route", "non-adjudication", "successor", "retention and access" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "notice-opportunity-to-be-heard-equality-impartiality-recusal-and-accommodation-data", "name": "Notice, opportunity to be heard, equality, impartiality, recusal and accommodation data", "description": "Structured forum-qualified case data for notice, opportunity to be heard, equality, impartiality, recusal and accommodation.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "notice-opportunity-to-be-heard-equality-impartiality-recusal-and-accommodation-record", "name": "Notice, opportunity to be heard, equality, impartiality, recusal and accommodation record", "description": "Versioned evidence-bearing case record for notice, opportunity to be heard, equality, impartiality, recusal and accommodation with rule, event and knowledge time, provenance and access marking.", "media_or_form": [ "logical court or arbitration case record", "authoritative docket or procedural evidence reference" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Case identifier plus notice-opportunity-to-be-heard-equality-impartiality-recusal-and-accommodation assertion or event identifier; party, title, forum, date and hash never identify the case alone.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] } ] }, { "id": "decisions-remedies-review-recognition-and-closure", "name": "Decisions, remedies, review, recognition and closure", "description": "Composes judgment children and links remedy, review and enforcement processes while keeping their masters separate.", "rationale": "Decision issuance, finality, precedential effect, recognition and enforcement can differ by forum and jurisdiction.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-003", "SRC-004", "SRC-005", "SRC-006", "SRC-008", "SRC-010" ], "layers": [ { "id": "judgment-award-reasons-remedies-and-finality", "name": "Judgment, award, reasons, remedies and finality", "description": "Records child decision membership and outcome metadata.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-003", "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ], "findings": [ { "id": "judgment-award-order-reasons-dissent-and-child-membership", "name": "Judgment, award, order, reasons, dissent and child membership", "description": "WM-POL-021 child identifier, decision kind, deciding composition, outcome, reasons, opinions, issue and publication references.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ], "questions": [ { "id": "judgment-award-order-reasons-dissent-and-child-membership-q01", "text": "What exact identities, roles, classes, values, links and unknowns define judgment, award, order, reasons, dissent and child membership for this case?", "kind": "composition", "answer_data": [ "identities and roles", "class and profile", "values and links", "unknowns" ] }, { "id": "judgment-award-order-reasons-dissent-and-child-membership-q02", "text": "Which forum authority, procedural rule, filing, evidence, order and event or knowledge time supports judgment, award, order, reasons, dissent and child membership?", "kind": "evidence", "answer_data": [ "forum and authority", "rule", "record or evidence", "order", "times" ] }, { "id": "judgment-award-order-reasons-dissent-and-child-membership-q03", "text": "How may judgment, award, order, reasons, dissent and child membership be validated, contested, corrected, superseded, retained or disclosed without adjudicating the dispute or erasing history?", "kind": "validation", "answer_data": [ "validation", "contest route", "non-adjudication", "successor", "retention and access" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "judgment-award-order-reasons-dissent-and-child-membership-data", "name": "Judgment, award, order, reasons, dissent and child membership data", "description": "Structured forum-qualified case data for judgment, award, order, reasons, dissent and child membership.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "judgment-award-order-reasons-dissent-and-child-membership-record", "name": "Judgment, award, order, reasons, dissent and child membership record", "description": "Versioned evidence-bearing case record for judgment, award, order, reasons, dissent and child membership with rule, event and knowledge time, provenance and access marking.", "media_or_form": [ "logical court or arbitration case record", "authoritative docket or procedural evidence reference" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Case identifier plus judgment-award-order-reasons-dissent-and-child-membership assertion or event identifier; party, title, forum, date and hash never identify the case alone.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null }, { "id": "remedy-cost-interest-performance-declaration-and-finality-state", "name": "Remedy, cost, interest, performance, declaration and finality state", "description": "External remedy references, addressee, terms, amount, currency, interest, finality assertion, operative scope and correction status.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ], "questions": [ { "id": "remedy-cost-interest-performance-declaration-and-finality-state-q01", "text": "What exact identities, roles, classes, values, links and unknowns define remedy, cost, interest, performance, declaration and finality state for this case?", "kind": "state", "answer_data": [ "identities and roles", "class and profile", "values and links", "unknowns" ] }, { "id": "remedy-cost-interest-performance-declaration-and-finality-state-q02", "text": "Which forum authority, procedural rule, filing, evidence, order and event or knowledge time supports remedy, cost, interest, performance, declaration and finality state?", "kind": "evidence", "answer_data": [ "forum and authority", "rule", "record or evidence", "order", "times" ] }, { "id": "remedy-cost-interest-performance-declaration-and-finality-state-q03", "text": "How may remedy, cost, interest, performance, declaration and finality state be validated, contested, corrected, superseded, retained or disclosed without adjudicating the dispute or erasing history?", "kind": "validation", "answer_data": [ "validation", "contest route", "non-adjudication", "successor", "retention and access" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "remedy-cost-interest-performance-declaration-and-finality-state-data", "name": "Remedy, cost, interest, performance, declaration and finality state data", "description": "Structured forum-qualified case data for remedy, cost, interest, performance, declaration and finality state.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "remedy-cost-interest-performance-declaration-and-finality-state-record", "name": "Remedy, cost, interest, performance, declaration and finality state record", "description": "Versioned evidence-bearing case record for remedy, cost, interest, performance, declaration and finality state with rule, event and knowledge time, provenance and access marking.", "media_or_form": [ "logical court or arbitration case record", "authoritative docket or procedural evidence reference" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Case identifier plus remedy-cost-interest-performance-declaration-and-finality-state assertion or event identifier; party, title, forum, date and hash never identify the case alone.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] }, { "id": "appeal-set-aside-recognition-enforcement-and-retention", "name": "Appeal, set-aside, recognition, enforcement and retention", "description": "Links successor proceedings and external execution without treating them as state flags.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-004", "SRC-005", "SRC-006", "SRC-008" ], "findings": [ { "id": "appeal-review-rehearing-set-aside-correction-and-successor-case", "name": "Appeal, review, rehearing, set-aside, correction and successor case", "description": "Challenged decision, route, forum, grounds, deadline, successor case, stay, outcome and effect on finality.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ], "questions": [ { "id": "appeal-review-rehearing-set-aside-correction-and-successor-case-q01", "text": "What exact identities, roles, classes, values, links and unknowns define appeal, review, rehearing, set-aside, correction and successor case for this case?", "kind": "lifecycle", "answer_data": [ "identities and roles", "class and profile", "values and links", "unknowns" ] }, { "id": "appeal-review-rehearing-set-aside-correction-and-successor-case-q02", "text": "Which forum authority, procedural rule, filing, evidence, order and event or knowledge time supports appeal, review, rehearing, set-aside, correction and successor case?", "kind": "evidence", "answer_data": [ "forum and authority", "rule", "record or evidence", "order", "times" ] }, { "id": "appeal-review-rehearing-set-aside-correction-and-successor-case-q03", "text": "How may appeal, review, rehearing, set-aside, correction and successor case be validated, contested, corrected, superseded, retained or disclosed without adjudicating the dispute or erasing history?", "kind": "validation", "answer_data": [ "validation", "contest route", "non-adjudication", "successor", "retention and access" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "appeal-review-rehearing-set-aside-correction-and-successor-case-data", "name": "Appeal, review, rehearing, set-aside, correction and successor case data", "description": "Structured forum-qualified case data for appeal, review, rehearing, set-aside, correction and successor case.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "appeal-review-rehearing-set-aside-correction-and-successor-case-record", "name": "Appeal, review, rehearing, set-aside, correction and successor case record", "description": "Versioned evidence-bearing case record for appeal, review, rehearing, set-aside, correction and successor case with rule, event and knowledge time, provenance and access marking.", "media_or_form": [ "logical court or arbitration case record", "authoritative docket or procedural evidence reference" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Case identifier plus appeal-review-rehearing-set-aside-correction-and-successor-case assertion or event identifier; party, title, forum, date and hash never identify the case alone.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null }, { "id": "recognition-enforcement-satisfaction-closure-archive-and-legal-hold", "name": "Recognition, enforcement, satisfaction, closure, archive and legal hold", "description": "External recognition or enforcement case, jurisdiction, refusal ground, satisfaction reference, closure basis, retention and hold.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-006", "SRC-008" ], "questions": [ { "id": "recognition-enforcement-satisfaction-closure-archive-and-legal-hold-q01", "text": "What exact identities, roles, classes, values, links and unknowns define recognition, enforcement, satisfaction, closure, archive and legal hold for this case?", "kind": "retention", "answer_data": [ "identities and roles", "class and profile", "values and links", "unknowns" ] }, { "id": "recognition-enforcement-satisfaction-closure-archive-and-legal-hold-q02", "text": "Which forum authority, procedural rule, filing, evidence, order and event or knowledge time supports recognition, enforcement, satisfaction, closure, archive and legal hold?", "kind": "evidence", "answer_data": [ "forum and authority", "rule", "record or evidence", "order", "times" ] }, { "id": "recognition-enforcement-satisfaction-closure-archive-and-legal-hold-q03", "text": "How may recognition, enforcement, satisfaction, closure, archive and legal hold be validated, contested, corrected, superseded, retained or disclosed without adjudicating the dispute or erasing history?", "kind": "validation", "answer_data": [ "validation", "contest route", "non-adjudication", "successor", "retention and access" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "recognition-enforcement-satisfaction-closure-archive-and-legal-hold-data", "name": "Recognition, enforcement, satisfaction, closure, archive and legal hold data", "description": "Structured forum-qualified case data for recognition, enforcement, satisfaction, closure, archive and legal hold.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-006", "SRC-008" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "recognition-enforcement-satisfaction-closure-archive-and-legal-hold-record", "name": "Recognition, enforcement, satisfaction, closure, archive and legal hold record", "description": "Versioned evidence-bearing case record for recognition, enforcement, satisfaction, closure, archive and legal hold with rule, event and knowledge time, provenance and access marking.", "media_or_form": [ "logical court or arbitration case record", "authoritative docket or procedural evidence reference" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Case identifier plus recognition-enforcement-satisfaction-closure-archive-and-legal-hold assertion or event identifier; party, title, forum, date and hash never identify the case alone.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-006", "SRC-008" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] } ] }, { "id": "publication-interoperability-and-agent-governance", "name": "Publication, interoperability and agent governance", "description": "Provides purpose-bound views, judicial-document projections and safe automated case maintenance.", "rationale": "Public court records and confidential arbitration records require different policies, and publication metadata cannot replace authoritative docket state.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-003", "SRC-004", "SRC-005", "SRC-008", "SRC-010" ], "layers": [ { "id": "access-confidentiality-publication-and-statistics", "name": "Access, confidentiality, publication and statistics", "description": "Controls party, forum, public and analytical projections.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-004", "SRC-008" ], "findings": [ { "id": "party-forum-public-confidential-sealed-and-redacted-view", "name": "Party, forum, public, confidential, sealed and redacted view", "description": "Audience, purpose, authority, field policy, pseudonymization, sealed scope, reasons access, expiry and re-identification risk.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ], "questions": [ { "id": "party-forum-public-confidential-sealed-and-redacted-view-q01", "text": "What exact identities, roles, classes, values, links and unknowns define party, forum, public, confidential, sealed and redacted view for this case?", "kind": "access", "answer_data": [ "identities and roles", "class and profile", "values and links", "unknowns" ] }, { "id": "party-forum-public-confidential-sealed-and-redacted-view-q02", "text": "Which forum authority, procedural rule, filing, evidence, order and event or knowledge time supports party, forum, public, confidential, sealed and redacted view?", "kind": "evidence", "answer_data": [ "forum and authority", "rule", "record or evidence", "order", "times" ] }, { "id": "party-forum-public-confidential-sealed-and-redacted-view-q03", "text": "How may party, forum, public, confidential, sealed and redacted view be validated, contested, corrected, superseded, retained or disclosed without adjudicating the dispute or erasing history?", "kind": "validation", "answer_data": [ "validation", "contest route", "non-adjudication", "successor", "retention and access" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "party-forum-public-confidential-sealed-and-redacted-view-data", "name": "Party, forum, public, confidential, sealed and redacted view data", "description": "Structured forum-qualified case data for party, forum, public, confidential, sealed and redacted view.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "party-forum-public-confidential-sealed-and-redacted-view-record", "name": "Party, forum, public, confidential, sealed and redacted view record", "description": "Versioned evidence-bearing case record for party, forum, public, confidential, sealed and redacted view with rule, event and knowledge time, provenance and access marking.", "media_or_form": [ "logical court or arbitration case record", "authoritative docket or procedural evidence reference" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Case identifier plus party-forum-public-confidential-sealed-and-redacted-view assertion or event identifier; party, title, forum, date and hash never identify the case alone.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null }, { "id": "caseload-duration-outcome-publication-and-bias-statistics", "name": "Caseload, duration, outcome, publication and bias statistics", "description": "Dataset, cohort, case stage, measures, denominator, suppression, method, uncertainty and prohibited individual inference.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-008" ], "questions": [ { "id": "caseload-duration-outcome-publication-and-bias-statistics-q01", "text": "What exact identities, roles, classes, values, links and unknowns define caseload, duration, outcome, publication and bias statistics for this case?", "kind": "measurement", "answer_data": [ "identities and roles", "class and profile", "values and links", "unknowns" ] }, { "id": "caseload-duration-outcome-publication-and-bias-statistics-q02", "text": "Which forum authority, procedural rule, filing, evidence, order and event or knowledge time supports caseload, duration, outcome, publication and bias statistics?", "kind": "evidence", "answer_data": [ "forum and authority", "rule", "record or evidence", "order", "times" ] }, { "id": "caseload-duration-outcome-publication-and-bias-statistics-q03", "text": "How may caseload, duration, outcome, publication and bias statistics be validated, contested, corrected, superseded, retained or disclosed without adjudicating the dispute or erasing history?", "kind": "validation", "answer_data": [ "validation", "contest route", "non-adjudication", "successor", "retention and access" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "caseload-duration-outcome-publication-and-bias-statistics-data", "name": "Caseload, duration, outcome, publication and bias statistics data", "description": "Structured forum-qualified case data for caseload, duration, outcome, publication and bias statistics.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-008" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "caseload-duration-outcome-publication-and-bias-statistics-record", "name": "Caseload, duration, outcome, publication and bias statistics record", "description": "Versioned evidence-bearing case record for caseload, duration, outcome, publication and bias statistics with rule, event and knowledge time, provenance and access marking.", "media_or_form": [ "logical court or arbitration case record", "authoritative docket or procedural evidence reference" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Case identifier plus caseload-duration-outcome-publication-and-bias-statistics assertion or event identifier; party, title, forum, date and hash never identify the case alone.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-008" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] }, { "id": "akoma-ecli-provenance-and-safe-agent-operations", "name": "Akoma, ECLI, provenance and safe agent operations", "description": "Maps case and decision metadata and controls autonomous actions.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-003", "SRC-008", "SRC-010" ], "findings": [ { "id": "akoma-ntoso-ecli-legalruleml-and-prov-projection", "name": "Akoma Ntoso, ECLI, LegalRuleML and PROV projection", "description": "Source and target versions, case and decision mapping, authority, transformed fields, omissions and round-trip limits.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-003", "SRC-008" ], "questions": [ { "id": "akoma-ntoso-ecli-legalruleml-and-prov-projection-q01", "text": "What exact identities, roles, classes, values, links and unknowns define akoma ntoso, ecli, legalruleml and prov projection for this case?", "kind": "interoperability", "answer_data": [ "identities and roles", "class and profile", "values and links", "unknowns" ] }, { "id": "akoma-ntoso-ecli-legalruleml-and-prov-projection-q02", "text": "Which forum authority, procedural rule, filing, evidence, order and event or knowledge time supports akoma ntoso, ecli, legalruleml and prov projection?", "kind": "evidence", "answer_data": [ "forum and authority", "rule", "record or evidence", "order", "times" ] }, { "id": "akoma-ntoso-ecli-legalruleml-and-prov-projection-q03", "text": "How may akoma ntoso, ecli, legalruleml and prov projection be validated, contested, corrected, superseded, retained or disclosed without adjudicating the dispute or erasing history?", "kind": "validation", "answer_data": [ "validation", "contest route", "non-adjudication", "successor", "retention and access" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "akoma-ntoso-ecli-legalruleml-and-prov-projection-data", "name": "Akoma Ntoso, ECLI, LegalRuleML and PROV projection data", "description": "Structured forum-qualified case data for akoma ntoso, ecli, legalruleml and prov projection.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-003", "SRC-008" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "akoma-ntoso-ecli-legalruleml-and-prov-projection-record", "name": "Akoma Ntoso, ECLI, LegalRuleML and PROV projection record", "description": "Versioned evidence-bearing case record for akoma ntoso, ecli, legalruleml and prov projection with rule, event and knowledge time, provenance and access marking.", "media_or_form": [ "logical court or arbitration case record", "authoritative docket or procedural evidence reference" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Case identifier plus akoma-ntoso-ecli-legalruleml-and-prov-projection assertion or event identifier; party, title, forum, date and hash never identify the case alone.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-003", "SRC-008" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null }, { "id": "agent-operation-authority-prewrite-postwrite-concurrency-and-recovery", "name": "Agent operation, authority, pre-write, post-write, concurrency and recovery", "description": "Operation class, actor, authority, preconditions, expected effects, stale-head check, validation, rollback and audit evidence.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005", "SRC-008", "SRC-010" ], "questions": [ { "id": "agent-operation-authority-prewrite-postwrite-concurrency-and-recovery-q01", "text": "What exact identities, roles, classes, values, links and unknowns define agent operation, authority, pre-write, post-write, concurrency and recovery for this case?", "kind": "security", "answer_data": [ "identities and roles", "class and profile", "values and links", "unknowns" ] }, { "id": "agent-operation-authority-prewrite-postwrite-concurrency-and-recovery-q02", "text": "Which forum authority, procedural rule, filing, evidence, order and event or knowledge time supports agent operation, authority, pre-write, post-write, concurrency and recovery?", "kind": "evidence", "answer_data": [ "forum and authority", "rule", "record or evidence", "order", "times" ] }, { "id": "agent-operation-authority-prewrite-postwrite-concurrency-and-recovery-q03", "text": "How may agent operation, authority, pre-write, post-write, concurrency and recovery be validated, contested, corrected, superseded, retained or disclosed without adjudicating the dispute or erasing history?", "kind": "validation", "answer_data": [ "validation", "contest route", "non-adjudication", "successor", "retention and access" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "agent-operation-authority-prewrite-postwrite-concurrency-and-recovery-data", "name": "Agent operation, authority, pre-write, post-write, concurrency and recovery data", "description": "Structured forum-qualified case data for agent operation, authority, pre-write, post-write, concurrency and recovery.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005", "SRC-008", "SRC-010" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "agent-operation-authority-prewrite-postwrite-concurrency-and-recovery-record", "name": "Agent operation, authority, pre-write, post-write, concurrency and recovery record", "description": "Versioned evidence-bearing case record for agent operation, authority, pre-write, post-write, concurrency and recovery with rule, event and knowledge time, provenance and access marking.", "media_or_form": [ "logical court or arbitration case record", "authoritative docket or procedural evidence reference" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Case identifier plus agent-operation-authority-prewrite-postwrite-concurrency-and-recovery assertion or event identifier; party, title, forum, date and hash never identify the case alone.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005", "SRC-008", "SRC-010" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] } ] } ] }, "functions": [ { "id": "open-case", "name": "Open case", "description": "Create docket identity, profile, forum assignment, jurisdiction basis and initial parties and claims.", "inputs": [ "case request", "forum", "procedure profile", "parties", "claims" ], "outputs": [ "open case revision" ], "preconditions": [ "forum competence, identity and initiation basis validate" ], "effects": [ "case becomes resolvable without deciding the dispute" ], "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ] }, { "id": "assign-panel-and-procedural-roles", "name": "Assign panel and procedural roles", "description": "Bind judges, arbitrators, clerk, parties and representatives with authority and conflict checks.", "inputs": [ "case", "actors", "roles", "appointments" ], "outputs": [ "role-assignment revision" ], "preconditions": [ "appointment, capacity and conflicts validate" ], "effects": [ "authorized participation becomes explicit" ], "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005", "SRC-008" ] }, { "id": "docket-filing-and-service", "name": "Docket filing and service", "description": "Attach a WM-POL-019 child, record receipt, acceptance and legally relevant service assertion.", "inputs": [ "case", "filing child", "submitter", "service evidence" ], "outputs": [ "docket and service events" ], "preconditions": [ "filing identity, authority and access validate" ], "effects": [ "procedural history advances without copying filing content" ], "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-007", "SRC-010" ] }, { "id": "schedule-deadline-or-hearing", "name": "Schedule deadline or hearing", "description": "Create a rule-grounded deadline, session or hearing with timezone, participants and accessibility needs.", "inputs": [ "case", "trigger or session", "rule", "calendar" ], "outputs": [ "schedule revision" ], "preconditions": [ "rule, conflicts and notice feasibility validate" ], "effects": [ "planned event is recorded separately from actual occurrence" ], "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-009", "SRC-010" ] }, { "id": "attach-evidence-and-record-ruling", "name": "Attach evidence and record ruling", "description": "Compose a WM-POL-020 child and record admission, exclusion, weight or custody references.", "inputs": [ "case", "evidence child", "proponent", "ruling" ], "outputs": [ "evidence-use revision" ], "preconditions": [ "child identity, authority and access validate" ], "effects": [ "case-specific use is recorded without replacing evidence history" ], "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005", "SRC-008" ] }, { "id": "issue-procedural-or-interim-order", "name": "Issue procedural or interim order", "description": "Record authority, terms, reasons, affected parties, effect interval and challenge route.", "inputs": [ "case", "order", "decider", "reasons" ], "outputs": [ "signed order event" ], "preconditions": [ "competence, notice and requested relief validate" ], "effects": [ "case state changes according to a citable order" ], "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ] }, { "id": "register-judgment-or-award-child", "name": "Register judgment or award child", "description": "Compose WM-POL-021 and record outcome, finality, remedy references, publication and opinions.", "inputs": [ "case", "decision child", "finality assertion" ], "outputs": [ "decision-membership and outcome revision" ], "preconditions": [ "decision identity and deciding authority validate" ], "effects": [ "outcome becomes queryable without copying judgment content" ], "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ] }, { "id": "link-review-recognition-or-enforcement-case", "name": "Link review, recognition or enforcement case", "description": "Connect appeal, set-aside, recognition or enforcement successors and effects on finality.", "inputs": [ "case", "decision", "successor case", "relation" ], "outputs": [ "typed successor relation" ], "preconditions": [ "jurisdiction, route and affected decision resolve" ], "effects": [ "post-decision lifecycle stays external and attributable" ], "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ] }, { "id": "issue-purpose-bound-case-view", "name": "Issue purpose-bound case view", "description": "Create party, forum, public, confidential, statistical or interoperability projection.", "inputs": [ "case revision", "audience", "purpose", "profile" ], "outputs": [ "validated case projection" ], "preconditions": [ "access, sealing, freshness and target version validate" ], "effects": [ "view links source digest, redactions and omissions" ], "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ] }, { "id": "close-archive-or-reopen-case", "name": "Close, archive or reopen case", "description": "Record closure basis, archive, legal hold or authorized reopening while preserving all cited history.", "inputs": [ "case", "authority", "basis", "retention policy" ], "outputs": [ "closure or reopening event" ], "preconditions": [ "pending matters, finality, holds and authority validate" ], "effects": [ "processing state changes without destroying the record" ], "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005", "SRC-008" ] } ], "composition": [ { "target": "WM-POL-019 Legal Filing / Pleading", "relation": "CHILD", "purpose": "Compose filings and pleadings into the docket while preserving their identity and lifecycle.", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-004" ] }, { "target": "WM-POL-020 Evidence Item / Exhibit", "relation": "CHILD", "purpose": "Compose evidence references and case-specific admission or use without taking custody ownership.", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-008" ] }, { "target": "WM-POL-021 Judgment / Legal Decision", "relation": "CHILD", "purpose": "Compose judgments, awards and decisions while keeping content, opinions and corrections independently governed.", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-003" ] }, { "target": "Forum, Person, Organization, Claim, Remedy, Review and Enforcement models", "relation": "REFERENCE", "purpose": "Resolve external actors, underlying matters, ordered consequences and post-decision processes.", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ] }, { "target": "Akoma Ntoso, ECLI, LegalRuleML and PROV-O", "relation": "ALIGN", "purpose": "Project judicial documents, case-law identity, legal assertions and provenance with declared loss.", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-003", "SRC-008" ] } ], "serviceLayers": { "dimension": { "owner_package_requirements": [ "Dimension identity, owner, court or arbitration case authority, records authority and namespace", "Case, forum, party-role, claim, filing, evidence, order, decision, review and enforcement registries", "Master-system mappings for forums, persons, organizations, contracts, offenses, filings, evidence, judgments and remedies", "Jurisdiction, procedure, service, due-process, confidentiality, publication, retention and agent-operation policies" ], "namespace_guidance": "Mint case and assertion identifiers only when no authoritative docket identity exists; keep forums, parties, claims, filings, evidence, decisions, remedies, appeals and enforcement as typed child or external references.", "registry_links": [ "https://ver.cy/models/", "https://ver.cy/model-agent-protocol.md", "Dimension-local case, docket, role, schedule, hearing, order, outcome and review-link registries" ] }, "canon_and_patch": { "canonicalization_rules": [ "Canonicalize by authoritative forum docket identifier and procedure profile, never by case title, party, claim, judge, date, ECLI or file hash.", "Keep case, forum, dispute, filing, evidence item, judgment, remedy, review and enforcement identities separate." ], "patch_rules": [ "Extensions declare jurisdiction and forum profile, target finding, procedure source, authority, classifier and exchange-profile versions and interoperability impact.", "Case identity, jurisdiction, child composition, decision finality or access semantics changes require a successor revision, migration map and preserved cited history." ], "compatibility_rules": [ "Unknown additive fields may be ignored only when identity, forum, jurisdiction, parties, claims, docket, child links, orders, finality, access and provenance remain intact.", "Every Akoma Ntoso, ECLI, LegalRuleML or sector projection pins versions and states transformed fields, omissions and round-trip limits." ] }, "artifact_rules": { "identity_priority": [ "Authoritative master-system docket or case-management identifier qualified by forum and jurisdiction.", "Governed globally resolvable case IRI with authoritative docket binding.", "Dimension UUID or ULID when no external identifier exists." ], "timestamp_rule": "Use RFC 3339 timestamps with seconds and offset or Z; separate filing, receipt, service, hearing, decision, legal-effect, publication, observation and knowledge times.", "serial_naming_rule": "Use {case-id}--{artifact-kind}--{assertion-or-event-id}; never use title, party, forum, date, ECLI or hash alone.", "integrity_rule": "Store digest, media type, forum, procedure and profile versions, authority, source anchors, event and knowledge times, confidentiality, quality, licence and access marking." }, "policies": [ "Only the competent forum or authorized tribunal actor may establish procedural orders, findings, decisions or case-state effects.", "Allegation, evidence, admission, finding, order, judgment, finality, recognition and enforcement remain distinct.", "Filings, evidence items and judgments retain child-model identity and are never flattened into the case record.", "Agents may perform reversible clerical operations and propose checks; adjudication, adverse orders, finality, sensitive disclosure and disposition require accountable authority." ], "crud": { "read": [ "Resolve Dimension, forum, jurisdiction, procedure profile, docket head, party access, sealed scope, event time and purpose." ], "create": [ "Create case identity, forum basis, procedure profile, parties, claims and explicit unknowns before docketing child records or orders." ], "update": [ "Append docket event, schedule, child link, ruling, order or outcome with actor, authority, rule, time and provenance; never overwrite cited history." ], "delete": [ "Apply appeal, sealing, legal hold and records policy; prefer closure or tombstone and never cascade to parties, filings, evidence, judgments or enforcement." ] }, "roles": [ { "name": "Forum records authority", "responsibilities": [ "Own canonical case identity, docket integrity and official procedural state." ] }, { "name": "Judge, tribunal or arbitral panel", "responsibilities": [ "Issue findings, orders and decisions within established competence." ] }, { "name": "Clerk or case administrator", "responsibilities": [ "Docket submissions, manage schedules, service records and procedural notices." ] }, { "name": "Party or representative", "responsibilities": [ "Submit filings, answer evidence and exercise procedural access and challenge rights." ] }, { "name": "Evidence custodian", "responsibilities": [ "Maintain external evidence identity, custody and integrity." ] }, { "name": "Publication and access steward", "responsibilities": [ "Apply public, sealed, confidential, redaction and statistical-view policy." ] }, { "name": "Records and retention steward", "responsibilities": [ "Apply archive, legal hold, disposition and recovery policy." ] } ], "access": { "default_rule": "Deny mutation and case-record disclosure unless forum authority, role, purpose and field policy grant it; arbitration and sealed material default to restricted access.", "scopes": [ "bundle", "layer", "finding", "artifact" ], "exceptions": [ "Due-process, appellate, oversight or statutory-publication access cites authority and remains purpose-bound, attributable and reviewable." ], "audit_requirements": [ "Log actor, agent, role, purpose, case, operation, policy, RFC 3339 time, forum authority, affected child records and outcome." ] }, "agents_bootstrap": { "filename": "AGENTS.md", "required_fields": [ "Name", "Type", "Specification URL", "Storage type URL", "Interface URL", "Processes URL" ], "read_order": [ "Read Dimension forum, jurisdiction, procedure, service, due-process, confidentiality, publication, retention and agent-operation policies.", "Read this model and WM-POL-019, WM-POL-020, WM-POL-021 plus linked forum, party, claim, remedy, review and enforcement models before mutation." ] } }, "coverage": { "claim": "A source-grounded reviewable draft of a court, tribunal or arbitration case across Akoma Ntoso, ECLI, UNCITRAL and HCCH instruments, PROV-O and OWL-Time, without universal procedure, automated adjudication, legal-advice, outcome-prediction or certified crosswalk claims.", "confidence": "medium", "checklist": [ { "dimension": "identity", "status": "covered", "notes": "Forum-qualified case identity is separated from forum, dispute, child records and enforcement." }, { "dimension": "classification and definition", "status": "covered", "notes": "Court, tribunal, arbitration, stage, track and procedure profiles are versioned." }, { "dimension": "direct properties", "status": "covered", "notes": "Docket, party roles, claims, schedule, hearings, orders, outcomes and finality assertions are first-class." }, { "dimension": "recognition and observation", "status": "covered", "notes": "Filing, service, attendance, admission, order, decision and publication evidence are covered." }, { "dimension": "capabilities and possible actions", "status": "covered", "notes": "Open, assign, docket, serve, schedule, hear, order, decide, link review, project and close operations are governed." }, { "dimension": "composition", "status": "covered", "notes": "WM-POL-019 filings, WM-POL-020 evidence and WM-POL-021 decisions retain child identity." }, { "dimension": "lifecycle", "status": "covered", "notes": "Opening, assignment, docketing, hearing, decision, review, closure, archive and reopening preserve history." }, { "dimension": "relationships", "status": "covered", "notes": "Forum, parties, claims, child records, orders, remedies, reviews and enforcement are typed." }, { "dimension": "temporal", "status": "covered", "notes": "Filing, receipt, service, hearing, decision, effect, publication and knowledge times remain distinct." }, { "dimension": "spatial", "status": "covered", "notes": "Jurisdiction, seat, venue and hearing location are referenced without importing place masters." }, { "dimension": "provenance", "status": "covered", "notes": "Docket derivation, responsible actors, source records, orders and decision links remain attributable." }, { "dimension": "ownership and stewardship", "status": "covered", "notes": "Forum, child record, party, remedy, review and enforcement masters remain separate." }, { "dimension": "validation and quality", "status": "covered", "notes": "Identity, competence, service, deadlines, child links, finality, access and stale-head checks are explicit." }, { "dimension": "access and privacy", "status": "covered", "notes": "Party, forum, public, confidential, sealed, redacted and statistical views are purpose-bound." }, { "dimension": "retention and deletion", "status": "covered", "notes": "Docket events, filings, evidence, decisions, review links and legal holds are preserved." }, { "dimension": "interoperability", "status": "covered", "notes": "Akoma Ntoso, ECLI, LegalRuleML and PROV projections are loss-aware." } ], "known_omissions": [ "No independent Claude or Grok result was available; later judicial-administration and arbitration review is required before canonical promotion.", "Jurisdiction-specific civil, criminal, administrative, constitutional, family, insolvency, appellate and arbitral procedure profiles require specialist review.", "Approved candidate CONTAINS relations identify child models but cardinalities and lifecycle contracts still require governance review.", "Certified Akoma Ntoso, ECLI, LegalRuleML and court-system crosswalks and conformance fixtures remain future work." ], "conflicts": [ "Court and arbitration cases share a record pattern but differ in jurisdiction basis, confidentiality, publication, appeal, set-aside and enforcement.", "Allegation, evidence, finding, order, judgment, finality, recognition and enforcement can legitimately disagree or occur at different times.", "A docket may join, sever, transfer, consolidate or reopen matters without a universal identity-continuity rule." ], "regional_assumptions": [ "ECLI is a European judicial-decision identifier and does not identify every case or define universal procedure.", "UNCITRAL instruments concern arbitration and depend on agreement and applicable national law.", "HCCH conventions govern specific cross-border service or judgment contexts and do not define domestic case lifecycle." ], "adversarial_checks": [ "Reject a case identified solely by title, party, claim, forum, year, ECLI or file hash.", "Reject filing, evidence or judgment content flattened into the case instead of child-model references.", "Reject evidence represented as a finding or allegation represented as adjudicated fact.", "Reject finality, recognition or enforcement inferred from decision issuance alone.", "Reject an agent action that adjudicates merits, exposes sealed material or destroys cited history without accountable authority." ] }, "researchAdjudication": { "providerMode": "single-provider-waiver", "activeProviders": [ "codex" ], "waivedProviders": [ "claude", "grok" ], "providerPolicy": { "contract_version": "1.0.0", "mode": "single-provider-waiver", "effective_at": "2026-09-06T00:00:00Z", "scope": "Canonical single-stream subject-model research after the six-workstream consolidation", "active_providers": [ "codex" ], "waived_providers": [ { "provider": "claude", "authorized_by": "repository owner", "authorized_at": "2026-09-06T00:00:00Z", "reason": "Claude produced no result on prior 1800-second and 900-second attempts and again timed out on bounded 600-second Sonnet and 300-second Haiku passes. The owner prioritized completion over provider availability." }, { "provider": "grok", "authorized_by": "repository owner", "authorized_at": "2026-09-06T00:00:00Z", "reason": "The repository owner authorized completion without Grok when Grok is unavailable, slow or schema-invalid. Grok may still be attempted as a bounded supplemental reviewer, but its failure never blocks a valid Claude plus no-tools result." } ], "review_rule": "Codex may complete source-grounded fallback research after bounded Claude and Grok attempts fail. It requires a separate no-tools adversarial audit and remains reviewable-draft with a visible absence-of-external-review hold.", "supplemental_provider_attempts": [ { "provider": "claude", "required": false, "maximum_attempts": 1, "failure_policy": "record-and-continue", "admission_rule": "Use only a locally schema-valid result whose sources and boundaries survive adjudication." }, { "provider": "grok", "required": false, "maximum_attempts": 1, "failure_policy": "record-and-continue", "admission_rule": "Use only a locally schema-valid result whose sources and boundaries survive adjudication." } ] }, "boundaryDecision": { "entry_kind": "aggregate", "status": "accepted as a forum-qualified case aggregate with governed child records", "rationale": "The case owns docket identity, procedural history, forum and party-role bindings, schedules, rulings and child composition. WM-POL-019 filings, WM-POL-020 evidence and WM-POL-021 decisions preserve their own identity and lifecycle; forums, parties, disputes, remedies, reviews and enforcement remain external masters." }, "decisions": [ { "concept": "Case versus forum", "disposition": "accepted as separate identities", "rationale": "A court, tribunal or arbitral institution is an organization with competence; a case is one proceeding in its docket or administration." }, { "concept": "Court and arbitration profiles", "disposition": "accepted under explicit profiles", "rationale": "They share a case-record pattern but jurisdiction basis, seat, confidentiality, publication, appeal, set-aside and enforcement cannot be flattened." }, { "concept": "Child legal records", "disposition": "candidate CONTAINS relations retained", "rationale": "WM-POL-019, WM-POL-020 and WM-POL-021 own filings, evidence items and decisions, while the case owns membership and case-specific use." }, { "concept": "Claims and findings", "disposition": "accepted as distinct assertion classes", "rationale": "Allegations, claims, submitted evidence, admission rulings, credibility assessments and findings of fact remain separately attributable." }, { "concept": "Service and deadlines", "disposition": "accepted as rule-grounded events", "rationale": "Transmission, receipt and legally effective service may differ, and every deadline records trigger, calendar, timezone, extension and compliance." }, { "concept": "Decision and finality", "disposition": "accepted as separate lifecycle assertions", "rationale": "Issuance, correction, finality, appeal, set-aside, recognition, enforcement and satisfaction may occur in different proceedings and times." }, { "concept": "Access and publication", "disposition": "accepted as forum-profiled views", "rationale": "Public court records, sealed matters and confidential arbitration require purpose, authority, redaction and re-identification controls." }, { "concept": "Interoperability", "disposition": "accepted as loss-aware projections", "rationale": "Akoma Ntoso, ECLI, LegalRuleML and provenance models identify different resources and cannot replace authoritative docket state." }, { "concept": "Automated adjudication", "disposition": "forbidden", "rationale": "Agents may maintain records and propose validations but cannot decide merits, predict a legally correct outcome or issue legal advice." } ], "publicationHolds": [ "Claude and Grok timed out during their bounded attempts, so independent external review is absent and explicitly waived for this published reviewable draft.", "Candidate CONTAINS relations to WM-POL-019, WM-POL-020 and WM-POL-021 still require approved cardinality, access and lifecycle contracts.", "Jurisdiction-specific civil, criminal, administrative, constitutional, family, insolvency, appellate and arbitral procedure profiles require specialist review.", "Certified Akoma Ntoso, ECLI, LegalRuleML and court-system crosswalks and conformance fixtures remain unverified.", "Independent external review was explicitly waived by the repository owner; this codex-only result remains a reviewable draft." ], "deferredResearch": [ "Approve composition cardinalities and ownership contracts for filings, evidence items and judgments.", "Develop court, tribunal, arbitration, appellate, criminal, civil and cross-border procedure profiles.", "Create fixtures for joinder, severance, transfer, failed service, sealed records, recusal, interim measures, partial awards, appeal, set-aside and reopening.", "Validate certified judicial-document and case-law projections with authority, time, access, information-loss and round-trip tests." ] }, "statistics": { "sources": 10, "bundles": 6, "layers": 12, "findings": 24, "questions": 72, "artifacts": 24, "functions": 10 } }