Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the 1998-99 Term, the Supreme Court of Canada handed down seven family law decisions. The most important family law decisions issued by the Court in the 1998-99 Term were in relation to family support obligations. In the cases of Chartier, Bracklow and M. v. H., the Court expanded the scope and content of support obligations, each with a heavy emphasis on the privatization of support obligations. M. v. H., which struck down the opposite sex definition of spouse for the purposes of spousal support, has perhaps the most far-reaching implications for family law. While the Court tried to limit its ruling to the specific provisions of the Ontario Family Law Act, the case raises many questions about the definition of spouse in Canadian family law, and the extent to which the law will be able to maintain distinctions between married and unmarried couples, and between heterosexual and same-sex couples. Other trends in this term's rulings include an emphasis on the fact drive and discretionary nature of family law proceedings, and the importance of appellate court deference to the findings of trial courts.Please enter abstract text here.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".