MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2216790139

Kingstreet Investments: Taking a Pass on the Defence of Passing On

2008· article· en· W2216790139 on OpenAlexaffabout
Benjamin Alarie

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace (University of Toronto) · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal principles and applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdjudicationSupreme courtAppealLawLaw and economicsRestitutionPolitical scienceEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The passing on defence is frequently invoked by defendants as a defence to claims for restitution. The defence was invoked by the Province in Kingstreet Investments v. New Brunswick in response to claims for the return of unconstitutional indirect taxes on sales of alcoholic beverages to licensees. Although the defence was accepted in principle by both the trial judge and the New Brunswick Court of Appeal, it was rejected soundly by the Supreme Court of Canada. In this comment I show that the passing on defence is economically irrelevant if one assumes that (i) there is perfect information; and (ii) adjudication is costless and error-free. I then argue that relaxing these assumptions suggests that the passing on defence is economically relevant, and that the correct response is to reject the defence, though only partly for the reasons advanced by the Supreme Court in Kingstreet Investments.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.317
Threshold uncertainty score0.631

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.016
Scholarly communication0.0130.005
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0220.016
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.061
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.227 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace (University of Toronto)Same topicLegal principles and applicationsFrench-language works237,207