Case Comment: Canada (A-G) v. S.D. Meyers, Inc., [2004] 3 F.C.J. No. 29.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chapter 11 of NAFTA grants substantive and procedural rights to investors of a NAFTA country who invest in another NAFTA jurisdiction. It allows citizens of Canada, the US and Mexico, who invest in another NAFTA country, the right to obtain damages for government measures in violation of the provisions of Chapter 11. The provisions of Chapter 11 have been the subject of both criticism and acclaim. Chapter 11 has been hailed as the hero of commercial investment efficiency, and as a villain seeking to maximize private business interests at the expense of national public interest. Chapter 11 is aimed at providing stability and reducing uncertainty with respect to decisions on whether to invest in the countries of NAFTA. Because there is no appellate tribunal designated within Chapter 11, arbitral decisions are subject to judicial review by domestic courts only in limited circumstances. However, the standard of review which the domestic courts of Canada, the United States and Mexico must apply to Chapter 11 arbitration cases is uncertain. The recent decision of the Federal Court in Canada (A.G.) v. S.D. Meyers, Inc. is an important case because it indicates the standard of review which Canadian courts will apply to the decisions of Chapter 11 arbitral tribunals. In addition, the case is the first time that a Chapter 11 arbitration award was heard before the losing party’s own judiciary.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".