SG-LegalCite: A Principle-Augmented Benchmark for Legal Citation Retrieval in Singapore Law

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.21057v1
• Date: Wed, 20 May 2026 11:43:27 GMT
• Title: SG-LegalCite: A Principle-Augmented Benchmark for Legal Citation Retrieval in Singapore Law
• Abstract summary: Legal citation in common-law systems depends not only on factual similarity, but also on the legal principle for which a precedent is invoked.<n>We propose a new retrieval paradigm that ranks cited cases based on queries integrating case facts and explicit legal principles.
• Score: 9.356037168975996
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Legal citation in common-law systems depends not only on factual similarity, but also on the legal principle for which a precedent is invoked. However, existing benchmarks for legal citation retrieval use case facts, citation context, or full judgments as inputs, where the governing legal principle is often missing or only implicitly expressed and entangled with broader context. As a result, models may retrieve precedents that are factually similar yet doctrinally irrelevant. This limitation is particularly consequential in Singapore, where the legal system has evolved independently: only domestic precedents are binding, while foreign authorities serve merely as persuasive references. Thus, we propose a new retrieval paradigm that ranks cited cases based on queries integrating case facts and explicit legal principles, inspired by real-world legal reasoning workflows. To support this paradigm, we introduce SG-LegalCite, a dataset of 100,890 case-principle pairs extracted from 8,523 Singapore Supreme Court judgments spanning from 2000 to 2025. Experiments across 11 baselines demonstrate the effectiveness of our principle-augmented retrieval paradigm, showing that explicit legal principles provide strong discriminative signals for legal citation retrieval.

Related papers

• LegalOne: A Family of Foundation Models for Reliable Legal Reasoning [54.57434222018289]
  We present LegalOne, a family of foundational models specifically tailored for the Chinese legal domain.<n>LegalOne is developed through a comprehensive three-phase pipeline designed to master legal reasoning.<n>We publicly release the LegalOne weights and the LegalKit evaluation framework to advance the field of Legal AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-31T10:18:32Z)
• ReaKase-8B: Legal Case Retrieval via Knowledge and Reasoning Representations with LLMs [37.688405624086315]
  A novel ReaKase-8B framework is proposed to leverage extracted legal facts, legal issues, legal relation triplets and legal reasoning for effective legal case retrieval.<n>Experiments on two benchmark datasets from COLIEE 2022 and COLIEE 2023 demonstrate that our knowledge and reasoning augmented embeddings substantially improve retrieval performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-30T06:35:36Z)
• LegalChainReasoner: A Legal Chain-guided Framework for Criminal Judicial Opinion Generation [6.754329137382816]
  We propose a new LegalAI task: Judicial Opinion Generation.<n>It simultaneously produces both legal reasoning and sentencing decisions.<n>Our approach ensures flexible knowledge injection and end-to-end opinion generation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-31T10:22:47Z)
• NyayaRAG: Realistic Legal Judgment Prediction with RAG under the Indian Common Law System [10.97442363933581]
  Legal Judgment Prediction (LJP) has emerged as a key area in AI for law, aiming to automate judicial outcome forecasting and enhance interpretability in legal reasoning.<n>We propose NyayaRAG, a Retrieval-Augmented Generation framework that simulates realistic courtroom scenarios.<n>Our results show that augmenting factual inputs with structured legal knowledge significantly improves both predictive accuracy and explanation quality.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-01T15:23:20Z)
• LegalSearchLM: Rethinking Legal Case Retrieval as Legal Elements Generation [9.894351313663874]
  Legal Case Retrieval (LCR) is a fundamental task for legal professionals.<n>Existing studies on LCR face two major limitations.<n>First, they are evaluated on relatively small-scale retrieval corpora.<n>Second, their reliance on embedding-based or lexical matching methods often results in limited representations and legally irrelevant matches.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-28T09:02:41Z)
• RLJP: Legal Judgment Prediction via First-Order Logic Rule-enhanced with Large Language Models [58.69183479148083]
  Legal Judgment Prediction (LJP) is a pivotal task in legal AI.<n>Existing LJP models integrate judicial precedents and legal knowledge for high performance.<n>But they neglect legal reasoning logic, a critical component of legal judgments requiring rigorous logical analysis.<n>This paper proposes a rule-enhanced legal judgment prediction framework based on first-order logic (FOL) formalism and comparative learning (CL)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-27T14:50:21Z)
• Legal Rule Induction: Towards Generalizable Principle Discovery from Analogous Judicial Precedents [39.35255423087048]
  Legal rules encompass not only codified statutes but also implicit adjudicatory principles derived from precedents that contain discretionary norms, social morality, and policy.<n>We formalize Legal Rule Induction (LRI) as the task of deriving concise, generalizable doctrinal rules from sets of analogous precedents.<n>We introduce the first LRI benchmark, comprising 5,121 case sets (38,088 Chinese cases in total) for model tuning and 216 expert-annotated gold test sets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-20T09:10:52Z)
• AnnoCaseLaw: A Richly-Annotated Dataset For Benchmarking Explainable Legal Judgment Prediction [56.797874973414636]
  AnnoCaseLaw is a first-of-its-kind dataset of 471 meticulously annotated U.S. Appeals Court negligence cases.<n>Our dataset lays the groundwork for more human-aligned, explainable Legal Judgment Prediction models.<n>Results demonstrate that LJP remains a formidable task, with application of legal precedent proving particularly difficult.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-28T19:14:48Z)
• How Vital is the Jurisprudential Relevance: Law Article Intervened Legal Case Retrieval and Matching [31.378981566988063]
  Legal case retrieval (LCR) aims to automatically scour for comparable legal cases based on a given query.<n>To address them, a daunting challenge is assessing the uniquely defined legal-rational similarity within the judicial domain.<n>We propose an end-to-end model named LCM-LAI to solve the above challenges.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-25T15:29:07Z)
• DELTA: Pre-train a Discriminative Encoder for Legal Case Retrieval via Structural Word Alignment [55.91429725404988]
  We introduce DELTA, a discriminative model designed for legal case retrieval. We leverage shallow decoders to create information bottlenecks, aiming to enhance the representation ability. Our approach can outperform existing state-of-the-art methods in legal case retrieval.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-27T10:40:14Z)
• Towards Explainability in Legal Outcome Prediction Models [64.00172507827499]
  We argue that precedent is a natural way of facilitating explainability for legal NLP models. By developing a taxonomy of legal precedent, we are able to compare human judges and neural models. We find that while the models learn to predict outcomes reasonably well, their use of precedent is unlike that of human judges.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-25T15:15:41Z)
• SAILER: Structure-aware Pre-trained Language Model for Legal Case Retrieval [75.05173891207214]
  Legal case retrieval plays a core role in the intelligent legal system. Most existing language models have difficulty understanding the long-distance dependencies between different structures. We propose a new Structure-Aware pre-traIned language model for LEgal case Retrieval.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-22T10:47:01Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.