§2 · Lane 1 — Rules-as-Code / Law-as-Code
Representing Legislative Rules as Code at Scale the foundation of the Law-to-Code Methodology
Mowbray, Chung, Greenleaf (2023) · CLSR 48
Bibliographic data
- Title
- Representing legislative Rules as Code: Reducing the problems of 'scaling up' (2023)
- Authors / Issuing body
- Andrew Mowbray (UTS), Philip Chung (UNSW Sydney), Graham Greenleaf (UNSW Sydney). AustLII.
- Venue / Publisher
- Computer Law & Security Review 48 (2023) 105772
- Year
- 2023
- Designation
- Academic
- Licence
- DOI — refer to publisher for full licence terms.
- Canonical link
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2022.105772
How to cite
Mowbray, Chung, Greenleaf (2023). Representing legislative Rules as Code: Reducing the problems of 'scaling up' (2023). Computer Law & Security Review 48 (2023) 105772. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2022.105772.
Methodology for representing legislative rules propositionally, with a pre-processor that scales the Rules-as-Code conversion to large bodies of legislation; demonstrates viability across 28,290 Australian statutes and 40,109 regulations in AustLII.
Why it matters for NETEVO
Closes the recurring objection that Rules-as-Code is workable for one statute but does not scale. The paper represents legislative rules propositionally and pairs that representation with a pre-processor that scales the conversion to large bodies of legislation. Viability is demonstrated on AustLII's running corpus of 28,290 Australian statutes and 40,109 regulations — evidence that scaled legislative encoding is industrial practice rather than an academic exercise, and the empirical foundation of the Law-to-Code Methodology.
Where NETEVO applies this
- AI Governance in ANZ Whitepaper — scalability sidebar — AustLII corpus volumes