Certification : the procedure, its role in class action proceedings in Ontario and the proposed South African certification procedure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
One of the primary reasons for the introduction of class actions is to improve access to justice. However, the existence of substantive barriers to the court system and its operation will bar litigants from pursuing meritorious claims, and this creates a wrong climate for class actions. It is therefore important that the legal infrastructure of class proceedings be designed in a way that counteracts such barriers and ensures efficient litigation. Class proceedings are necessary to deal with the burden which is placed on the normal litigation process by the complex demands of a large number of litigants, and is of necessity a procedural mechanism. Certification is a vital part of such a mechanism and its role is to ensure that class proceedings are appropriate. Therefore, until a potential action is certified, it is not a class action. In South Africa constitutional provision has been made for class actions and public interest actions. The South African Law Commission recommended legislation to provide for these actions in general practice, and included draft legislation in its recommendations. Since no legislation has been forthcoming, the proposed legislation pertaining to certification will be evaluated against the Ontario legislation to test its potential effectiveness.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".