The Montreal Convention 1999 and Nigerian Law: Uncertainty, Uninterrupted
Bibliographic record
Abstract
International air carrier liability under Nigerian law has, for some time past, been shrouded in uncertainty because of the ambivalence with which Nigerian courts applied the Warsaw Convention 1929 as regards its exclusivity or otherwise, vis–à–vis actions and remedies. Consequently, it was hoped that the Montreal Convention 1999, which expressly forbids the application of national laws to international air carriage claims would ameliorate the situation. Unfortunately, the passage of the Civil Aviation Act 2006, which gives the Montreal Convention the force of law in Nigeria, also repealed the Warsaw Convention. This article discusses the liability regime under Nigerian law as it stood prior to the Act and the vacuum which has now been created by the repeal of the Warsaw Convention, which means that where the departing or destination country is not a signatory to the Montreal Convention, Nigeria’s national laws must be applied. The article further analyzes pertinent parts of the language of the Montreal Convention and its travaux préparatoires and argues that the provision which robs the Warsaw Convention of the force of law ought to be repealed immediately.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".