The Supreme Court of Canada: Its History, Powers and Responsibilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In September 2000, the Supreme Court of Canada celebrated its 125th anniversary.This occasion provided Canadians, and especially those of us intimately related to the Court, with an opportunity to reflect upon the development of this national institution.As part of the celebrations, a conference on various topics drew our attention to the incremental steps taken through which the modem Supreme Court of Canada has emerged from its unpromising and modest beginning.'Commemorating 125 years of the Court's work also occasioned some reflection on the structure and composition of the Court, and the manner in which its position has evolved over time.This essay aims to provide an overview of the historical development of the Court and a discussion of its present-day role, jurisdiction, and responsibilities.This will, I hope, afford an understanding of the Supreme Court of Canada's tradition as well as a basis for comparative assessments with judicial systems and approaches in other nations.* Puisne Judge, Supreme Court of Canada.I should like to thank Angela Campbell and Katrina Gustafson, my law clerks, for their invaluable assistance in the research and preparation of these remarks.1.
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 | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.030 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 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".