MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1604356878

A frolic in the law of tort: expanding the scope of employers' vicarious liability

2004· article· en· W1604356878 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rick Glofcheski

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal principles and applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVicarious liabilityTortLiabilityContext (archaeology)LawScope (computer science)Supreme courtStrict liabilityBusinessPolitical scienceLaw and economicsSociologyHistory
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The traditional approach to the imposition of employers' vicarious liability has recently been reconsidered and revised by the Supreme Court of Canada and the House of Lords, in the context of employees' sexual assaults committed against young persons in their charge. Under the new, more flexible approach, vicarious liability can be imposed on the basis of a close connection between the employment and the tort. This change is more than cosmetic. It is no longer necessary to show that the employee's wrongful act was a mode of carrying out the employment duties. This article reviews the case law in which this development has taken place, and considers the appropriateness of the close connection principle to cases of negligence-based torts.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.038
Scholarly communication0.0090.015
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0140.015
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.301 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicLegal principles and applicationsFrench-language works237,207