I always shuddered a bit when I used Law--Biblical teaching, especially when it applied to "law" in the Old Testament here.
"Nomos" is the usual translation of "torah" in the Old Testament in Greek; however,Torah also has a sense of teaching and custom, not "law" in our Western sense nor in the sense as it is interpreted by some Protestant denominations.
I would now urge you all to read the article in current Journal of Biblical Literature, vol. 135, no.2 by Joshua Berman. He makes the case that law in the Old Testament does not have the meaning of codified laws or legislation, but its sense is common law; the various laws in the Old Testament, no matter what book they are in is an interpretation of a previous law, an interpretation does not supplement the previous law--it complements it. Given that, we should reconsider our use of Law-Biblical teaching. And we should be very careful of using Class K for the descriptions of what is allowed as revealed in Mishnah or the Talmud. Even in the Talmud, we do not a sense of legislation, but clarifying statements about what a previous rabbi meant.
I would recommend this article by all parties involved, SACO, NACO, Library of Congress's construction committee when it comes of class K.
Perhaps we could have Biblical law--Interpretation and construction (using the pattern heading of legislation in SHM)
Anyway article is quite good lends some literary warrant for how we treat "Biblical" law and I would suggest for legal matters that were discussed and implemented in post-return from exile times.