MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2026403218 · doi:10.7202/042848ar

La libération de la caution par la faute du créancier

2005· article· en· W2026403218 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Louise Poudrier-LeBel

Bibliographic record

VenueLes Cahiers de droit · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Insolvency and Governance
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCreditorDutyNoticeContext (archaeology)LoanLawSupreme courtDebtLaw and economicsBusinessEconomicsPolitical scienceFinanceHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the decision of the Supreme Court in Soucisse, a growing number of sureties try to obtain their liberation by invoking a fault of the creditor. This phenomenon occurs in the province of Quebec as in the other provinces of Canada. This paper relates mostly to the Quebec Law. The sureties plead a fault in information about the nature or the consequences of their contract or about the risks and circumstances of the operation. The author writes that such a general duty of information does not exist, except if the creditor has been contractually engaged to do so. Nevertheless, if the creditor gives wrong information with bad faith, he will be held liable. Secondly, the sureties invoke the recall of the loan. Here again, there is no fault on the creditor's part, if the term is arrived or if a reasonable notice has been given when the debt is payable on demand. But if the creditor has promised that he would not recall his loan for a certain period, he must do so. Thirdly, the sureties invoke a fault in the realization of the securities for a low price. The courts will ascertain whether the sale has been held in accordance with prescriptions of the law for this type of security. If the creditor sells privatly, the courts do not hold him liable if the price obtained is justified within the economic context. In case of a fault in the realization of the securities, an action on liability belongs to the principal, the company, and not to the surety, the shareholder, a victim by ricochet, except if the goods are his own. Nevertheless if the surety is sued, he may oppose a fin denon-recevoir. The burden of the proof of the fault will be more or less easy according to the circumstances of the case. Most often, an exoneration clause will deny liability except in the case of bad faith. In the absence of such a clause, the criterium is that of a reasonable man. Sureties must also prove the amount of the prejudice. Recent amendments to the Bank Act and to the Act respecting Bills of lading, Receipts and Transferts of property in stock impose new standards of conduct on the creditor and will offer more protection to sureties.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.646
Threshold uncertainty score0.713

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.014
Scholarly communication0.0120.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0100.019
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.004

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.183 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLes Cahiers de droitSame topicCorporate Insolvency and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207