A fact established by a court

Intention

I want to present court-established intent as a case fact while keeping its origin.

Intent arrives as a presented fact with its origin; it is not computed.

Correct formFrozen execution sceneBoundary

Incorrect form and why it stays silent

Incorrect form

assert intent_established(p) { origin adjudicated; judgment { authority Court; } }

A judgment object is not expressed by this surface. origin adjudicated is written separately; for an empirical relation this is the origin of the fact, not an automatic check of the authority.

Correct form

Arxo Law

language "law.core" version "0.2";
package recipes.z.r05 version "0.1.0";
namespace "urn:recipe:z-interpretations:05";

entity Person;
relation intent_established(p: Person) kind empirical;
relation intent_element(p: Person);
rule Intent strict { for p: Person; when intent_established(p); then intent_element(p); }

Frozen execution scene

Facts and choice	Question	Answer
1. intent established by a court	intent_element	TRUE_ONLY / COMPUTED
2. same atom introduced by a party	intent_element	TRUE_ONLY / COMPUTED
3. fact not presented	intent_element	NEITHER / COMPUTED

intent established by court

Arxo Law

test "intent established by court" {
    given {
        context {
            legal_time @2026-09-13;
            decision_time @2026-09-13T09:00:00+05:00;
            knowledge_time @2026-09-13T09:00:00+05:00;
            timezone "Asia/Almaty";

        }
        assert intent_established(entity_ref("urn:recipe:z-interpretations:05:p")) { origin adjudicated; }
    }
    evaluate truth(intent_element(entity_ref("urn:recipe:z-interpretations:05:p")));
    expect truth_status == TRUE_ONLY;
    expect evaluation_status == COMPUTED;

}

same atom entered by party

Arxo Law

test "same atom entered by party" {
    given {
        context {
            legal_time @2026-09-13;
            decision_time @2026-09-13T09:00:00+05:00;
            knowledge_time @2026-09-13T09:00:00+05:00;
            timezone "Asia/Almaty";

        }
        assert intent_established(entity_ref("urn:recipe:z-interpretations:05:p")) { origin case_input; }
    }
    evaluate truth(intent_element(entity_ref("urn:recipe:z-interpretations:05:p")));
    expect truth_status == TRUE_ONLY;
    expect evaluation_status == COMPUTED;

}

fact not presented

Arxo Law

test "fact not presented" {
    given {
        context {
            legal_time @2026-09-13;
            decision_time @2026-09-13T09:00:00+05:00;
            knowledge_time @2026-09-13T09:00:00+05:00;
            timezone "Asia/Almaty";

        }

    }
    evaluate truth(intent_element(entity_ref("urn:recipe:z-interpretations:05:p")));
    expect truth_status == NEITHER;
    expect evaluation_status == COMPUTED;
    expect judgment_requests(0);
}

Counterfactual

Sidecar mutation: origin adjudicated; → origin adjudicated; judgment { authority Court; }; expected LDC-E0201. Additional scenes with fragment deletion are marked in the table; the outcome is checked by both evaluators.

Boundary

For an assessment delegated to an authority, use A judgment on a live branch; for checking the answering authority, A judge’s answer with authority and form. An ordinary empirical relation also accepts case_input: the engine does not prove that the fact was actually established by a court.

Pitfall

Intent is a fact, not a computed judgment. The scenes compare an adjudicated origin, a party-supplied origin, and absence of the fact; the first two give the same truth with different origins.