Bibliographic record
Abstract
On 5 February 1970, after international legal proceedings spanning twelve years, and more than two decades after the dispute had arisen, the President of the International Court of Justice, Judge Bustamante y Rivero, read out the Court's judgment in the Case Concerning the Barcelona Traction, Light and Power Co., Ltd . In that judgment, the Court held that, under international law, the nationality of corporations depended on national incorporation rules and that the violation of shareholders' rights did not normally constitute a separate breach of international law. The Barcelona Traction, Light and Power Co., having been incorporated under Canadian law, therefore was to be treated as Canadian, although 88 per cent of its shares were held by Belgian shareholders, and Belgium could not espouse claims of diplomatic protection. Highly controversial at its time, this holding remains the crucial judicial pronouncement on the nationality of corporations to date. A quick glance at the textbooks, however, reveals that Barcelona Traction is more than a controversial decision on the question of diplomatic protection of corporations. Two paragraphs of the judgment have taken on a life of their own and have inspired much discussion among States, courts, commissions, and commentators. Although they did not affect the rules of nationality, nor indeed any other central aspect of the case before the Court, these two paragraphs are among the most famous judicial pronouncements in the ICJ's history. Since they provide the starting-point of the present study, they merit to be quoted in full.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.513 | 0.339 |
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".