Les réactions de la doctrine à la création du droit par les juges : le droit des entreprises
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper attempts to survey the present state of the law and current trends in legal literature as regards the concept of enterprise in Quebec law. The legal concept of enterprise does not carry the same meaning for all legal scholars in Quebec. A more traditional group restricts it to cases where some type of legal entity is created as a subject of rights and liabilities. A modernist group is prepared to give legal recognition to the enterprise as the basic economic unit, having rights and duties on a broad societal scale. This latter approach, closer to the realities of economics, is obviously followed in federal and Quebec legislation, whether protective or interventionist, with the result that conflicting definitions of the enterprise have been used for many different purposes. Through an increasing body of published writings, Quebec legal scholars have been contributing to the rationalization and harmonization of commercial law in relation to the concept of enterprise. Judicial adherence to traditional views has sometimes prevented or slowed down the implementation of rules suggested by scholars. In some cases, though, bold judicial pronouncements have met with unqualified approval from the writers. In certain areas, administrative bodies such as regulatory agencies have clearly outdone the regular courts at creative and effective law-making. In spite of shortcomings on the part of legal writers, legislators and judges, a concept of enterprise is gradually emerging as the key element in the development of a more realistic system of commercial law.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.026 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
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".