What is "Equity"? Of Comparative Law, Time Travel and Judicial Cultures
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
What is "equity"? Does it mean the same as the word "équité" in French ? Can the word "equity", used in an English or an American legal text, be translated readily by équité without being misleading? The answer to those two last questions is no. In the language of the common law, "equity" means something very specific and much more complicated than what we have in mind when we say équité in our civil law traditions. The present paper, adapted from a lecture given in Brasilia, attempts to shed some light on this awkward subject, as it compares the notion of équité in the French civil law tradition with the concept of equity indigenous to the English common law tradition. The mode of presentation used is that of the imaginary time machine: specialists of équité are thus interviewed one by one (Montesquieu, Portalis, Justice Magnaud) in chronological order, followed by English judges associated with the development of equity (Lord Coke, Chancellor Ellesmere and Lord Denning), Those historical figures use examples borrowed from their own time in order to illustrate the workings of équité /equity: in France the principle of liability for things and the abuse of rights theory, in England the trust, the estoppel and the injunction. As a conclusion, we discover that equity does not necessarily mean fair, and that équité has to express itself indirectly under the guise of judicial interpretation.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it