Defending the hierarchical result models of precedential constraint

Abstract

In recent years, hierarchical case-based-reasoning models of precedential constraint have been proposed. Trevor Bench-Capon criticised these models, among other things, on the grounds that they would not account for the possibility that intermediate factors are established with different strengths by different base-level factors. In this paper we respond to these criticisms for van Woerkom’s result-based hierarchical models. We argue that in some examples Bench-Capon seems to interpret intermediate factors as dimensions, and that applying van Woerkom’s dimension-based version of the hierarchical result model to these examples avoids Bench-Capon’s criticisms.