Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2008-2009, the Supreme Court of Canada issued judgments in three appeals squarely within family law and a fourth that bridges family law and constitutional law. The former all address the economic consequences of the dissolution of an opposite-sex marriage. In Stein v. Stein, the majority uphold an order, made under the Family Relations Act of British Columbia, that spouses share a future tax liability that could not be valued at trial. M.T. v. J.-Y.T. concerned the interpretation of the exceptional rule permitting an unequal partition of the family patrimony under the Civil Code of Quebec. The Court overturned an order that had excluded the husband’s pension credits from the family patrimony, emphasizing the exceptional character of uneven partition and the legislature’s vision of marriage as an economic partnership. Together these two appeals indicate that judges should use caution in deploying the rules permitting a departure from presumptively equal sharing on marriage breakdown. In Rick v. Brandsema, the Court set aside a separation agreement on the basis that it was unconscionable. The Court emphasized the duty of full, honest disclosure during spousal negotiations as well as the importance of a court’s verifying whether professional assistance has, in fact, compensated for vulnerability. The parties had wished to divide their property equally and their agreement failed to carry out that wish. The judgment raises questions about the intended reach of the Court’s precedent in Miglin v. Miglin, as well as the relationship between common law doctrines and statutory regimes.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".