La responsabilité civile de la puissance publique: du clair obscur au nébuleux
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Comment concilier le régime de responsabilité pour faute applicable à la puissance publique avec l'ampleur des pouvoirs discrétionnaires conférés aux autorités publiques pour la réalisation de leur mission de service public. Depuis dix ans, la jurisprudence cherche à asseoir ce régime sur des bases solides, en distinguant le niveau de la définition des politiques (niveau planification ou planning) du niveau de la mise en oeuvre de ces politiques (niveau opérationnel). Après un bon départ en 1980, la Cour suprême n'a réussi qu'à embrouiller la situation des arrêts Kamloops à Just. Mais voilà qu'en 1990 la Chambre des lords, qui avait inspiré cette jurisprudence par son célèbre arrêt Anns (1978), fait marche arrière ; l'arrêt Murphy prononcé par ces éminents magistrats aura-t-il des retombées dans l'ancienne colonie au cordon ombilical souvent si tenace ? Le biculturalisme juridique qui caractérise notre situation permet-il de sortir de l'impasse ?
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 | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.035 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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".