Bibliographic record
Abstract
The US class action model and experience has influenced Canadian developments in collective litigation such that in recent years there has been a frenzy of legislative activity making class actions available virtually throughout the country. Now that two thirds of NAFTA is a class action zone, few policy obstacles stand in the way of actions covering both markets. For these to be viable, however, preclusive effect against class members in one country must be forthcoming for judgments or settlements rendered in the other country. In the first decision to consider this issue on the Canadian side, an Ontario appellate court held that an Illinois settlement was not binding on absent Canadian class members, on the basis of inadequate notice. Despite this negative conclusion, the judgment heralds a positive future for USA-Canada class actions by declaring a principle of recognition, dependant only on evidence of procedural fairness. This evidence is based on criteria well known to American doctrine and jurisprudence, namely adequacy of notice and of representation. The manner in which these requirements can be met is explored in the article, along with other possible means of enhancing efficiency and fairness in the context of cross-border class actions.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".