# Claim forms from the corpus

> Updated 3 October 2026: `concept`, `except_when`, `claim`, `definition … sufficient`, and `default` strength have been removed, together with their special deprecation diagnostic. References below to the former behavior and corpus sources are historical. New source uses `relation`, `unless`, `duty`, a strict rule, and `defeasible`.

Analysis of real fragments: the package identifier, the act, the form verdict
(exemplary / disputed / wrong form choice), and why.

## Law

### 1. Nuremberg Principles — the only use of `then claim` (exemplary)

Package `un.ilc.nuremberg_principles` — Nuremberg Principles (international law):

```law
@source(NP_PRINCIPLE_5)
rule RightToFairTrial(
    who: Person,
    organ: Authority,
    deed: Deed,
    opened: Date,
    closed: Date,
) strict {
    label en official "Principle V. Any person charged with a crime under international law has the right to a fair trial on the facts and law";
    when charged_by(who, organ, deed)
        and trial_window(deed, opened, closed);
    then claim FairTrial {
        holder who;
        against organ;
        goal achievement {
            condition fair_trial_afforded(who, deed);
            window [opened, closed];
        }
    };
}
```

Exemplary: all three view fields in place, cross-wired parties
(`holder` — the accused becomes `beneficiary`, `against` — the tribunal becomes
`bearer`), the window — the trial period. Lowering — to `duty` with the same hash.
The source's only correction: the record carries warning
`LDC-E1328` and migrates to `duty` in 0.2.

### 2. Kazakhstan Civil Code — a guardian's power with `valid_when` (exemplary)

Package `kz.corpus.civilcode` — Civil Code of Kazakhstan:

```law
then power SovershatSdelkiOtImeniNedeesposobnogo {
    holder guardian;
    over ward;
    exercise guardian_concludes_transaction_for_incapacitated(guardian, transaction, ward);
    effect transaction_authorised_for_incapacitated_person(transaction);
    valid_when guardian_of(guardian, ward);
};
```

Exemplary: the "transact on another's behalf" entitlement lowered to
a power, not a duty (the guardian has no duty to transact — there is a power, and it is
conditional). The rule body binds every head variable:
`guardian`, `ward`, `transaction` — from three `when` premises.

### 3. US Tax Code — counterclaim power (exemplary)

Package `us.irc.judicial_proceedings` — US Internal Revenue Code, judicial proceedings:

```law
then power S7422eUnitedStatesCounterclaim {
    holder us.irc.core::Secretary;
    exercise us_counterclaim_or_intervention_filed_on(pr, n, on);
    valid_when counterclaim_within_stay_permitted(pr, n, on);
    effect counterclaim_or_intervention_allowed(pr, n);
};
```

Exemplary: the source's "may counterclaim" is a power with an admissibility
check in `valid_when`, not liberty (liberty needs a window,
which the text does not name) and not a duty. The anchor carries relation
attributes and a quote (`relation = formalizes, coverage = exact, quote = "…"`).

## Standard and regulation

### 4. EU Regulation 261/2004 — extraordinary circumstances as judgment (exemplary)

Package `eu.transport.air_passenger_rights` — EU air passenger rights:

```law
pub external judgment relation extraordinary_circumstances(f: Flight) {
    label en official "the cancellation was caused by extraordinary circumstances ...";
    authority Court;
}
```

An adjacent illustration of the claim boundary: the package's "right to compensation"
is lowered not to `claim` but to the carrier's duty and an exemption from it
(`carrier_exempt_from_compensation`); the evaluative feature ("extraordinary
circumstances") went to the judgment channel, not into a claim condition.
Exemplary: two different questions — two different mechanisms.

### 5. EU Charter — entitlement as an institutional fact (exemplary)

Package `eu.charter_of_fundamental_rights` — EU Charter of Fundamental Rights:

```law
relation social_security_entitlement_recognised(subject: Person) kind institutional {
    label en official "the entitlement to social security benefits and social services is recognised and respected by the Union";
    ...
}
```

Exemplary for entitlement lowering: the source's "entitlement" lowered to a constitutive
institutional fact (recognition), not a duty — a programmatic provision has no obliged party
with concrete content, and the comment in the file records it directly: "NO POSITION".
This is the "constitutive
eligibility fact" lowering from the lowering list.

## Religion

### 6. Quran, sura "Dominion" — liberties, not claims (exemplary)

Package `quran.mulk` — Quran, sura "Dominion":

```law
rule Mlk13ConcealOrProclaimRule(p: Person) strict {
    when mlk_plural_addressed(p);
    then liberty Mlk13ConcealOrProclaim { holder p; action mlk_speech_concealed_or_proclaimed(p); window [@0001-01-01, infinity); };
}
```

Exemplary as a negative reference point: the "conceal or proclaim" permission
is written as `liberty` with a window, not as a claim — the permission has no second party
(`against`), and the correlative view does not apply here. A claim without `against`
is not a claim.

## Teaching packages

### 7. UAE lease — the neighbouring `prohibition` form (exemplary)

Package `ae.corpus.civil_transactions.lease` — UAE civil transactions, lease:

```law
then prohibition LenderNoEarlyReclaim {
```

The prohibition form lives when it matches the lawyer's vocabulary ("is prohibited")
— the corpus uses prohibitions far more often than `claim`. Exemplary for
the selection rule: the act's vocabulary decides between forms; the semantics are one
(lowering to `duty` with `forbearance`).