MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2029442602 · doi:10.7202/043234ar

La responsabilité civile du pollueur : de la théorie de l'abus de droit au principe du pollueur-payeur

2005· article· fr· W2029442602 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Hélène Trudeau

Bibliographic record

VenueLes Cahiers de droit · 2005
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicInternational Environmental Law and Policies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les règles de responsabilité civile du droit commun — et en particulier la théorie de l'abus de droit—s'avèrent dans la plupart des cas insuffisantes pour assurer la réparation des dommages de pollution. Les difficultés de preuve et l'absence de prise en considération du préjudice écologique constituent les principaux obstacles à une indemnisation adéquate des dommages liés aux activités polluantes. Rendu populaire depuis une vingtaine d'années dans les pays industrialisés, le principe économique du pollueur-payeur a servi d'inspiration dans l’élaboration de nouveaux régimes statutaires de responsabilité civile pour dommages de pollution. L'auteure examine dans un premier temps les conséquences juridiques du principe du pollueur-payeur et fait état d'un modèle théorique de responsabilité civile basé sur la coexistence d'une responsabilité sans faute et d'un fonds d’indemnisation financé par les pollueurs potentiels. Dans un deuxième temps, deux régimes de responsabilité statutaire qui appliquent partiellement ce modèle sont brièvement décrits : le régime américain mis en place par la loi CERCLA et les dispositions québécoises prévues dans la section IV.2.1 de la Loi sur la qualité de l'environnement.

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)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.016
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.003
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations2
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLes Cahiers de droitSame topicInternational Environmental Law and PoliciesFrench-language works237,207