satisfies) the category of facts delineated by Element 1, Fact 2 fits within the
category of facts delineated by Element 2, and so on. Overall, the arrow
portrays the proposition that Facts 1-n in Column 3 fall within the categories
delineated by Elements 1-n in Column 1 and thus satisfy Elements 1-n.
The third column displays the conclusion. Since the rule applies to Facts 1-n
the Consequences designated by the rule apply to those facts. The third
column lists Facts 1-n. Beneath Facts 1-n
is located an arrow leading to the
row containing ‘‘Consequences.’’ This is how the diagram portrays the
conclusion to the syllogism, namely: “Facts 1-n cause Consequences”.
Explanation
To explain how this syllogism works we consider its components in turn –
major premise, minor premise and conclusion.
Major Premise
The major premise of the syllogism is represented by the legal rule in the first
column. It takes the following form: “Facts that fall within the categories of
facts designated by Elements 1-n cause Consequences”.
This, it is worth
emphasising, comprises a conditional statement, which constitutes the
standard structure of a legal rule.
71
A legal rule is true, and thus capable of forming a syllogism which is sound,
when it represents a correct statement of the law. This happens when two
requirements are met. First, the rule itself is correctly formulated. Second,
where it is necessary to interpret the rule before applying it, the rule has been
correctly interpreted.
Minor Premise
The minor premise is represented by the relationship
between Elements 1-n
and the facts of a case
(meaning the material facts). It takes the form: “The
facts of this case, Facts 1-n, fall within the categories designated by Elements
1-n”.
Now for this premise to be true, two requirements must be satisfied. First, it is
implicit in this statement that Facts 1-n are not just alleged but are actually true.
___________________
71
As discussion in Chapter 3 Analysing Legal rules revealed, a legal rule is a
conditional statement. That this is the case becomes clearer when the rule is
restated
in a way which does not alter its meaning but reveals its conditional
nature: ‘If the facts of the case fall within the overall category of facts defined by
the elements, the consequences described by the rule apply to those facts.’ The
point is that a conditional statement packages the major premise of a syllogism.
 |
 |
 |