MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2460071636 · doi:10.29173/alr114

Public Policy and Recognition of Foreign Divorces: Zhang v Lin and Marzara v Marzara

2012· article· en· W2460071636 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Gerald B. Robertson

Bibliographic record

VenueAlberta Law Review · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicConflict of Laws and Jurisdiction
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsZhàngEnforcementForeign policyScope (computer science)Power (physics)Public policyPolitical scienceLawLaw and economicsEconomicsChinaPoliticsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two recent cases — one from Alberta and the other from British Columbia — deal with the power of a Canadian court to refuse recognition of a foreign divorce on grounds of public policy. As is the case with foreign judgments generally, a foreign divorce that would otherwise be valid and enforceable in Canada will be denied recognition if its enforcement would be contrary to fundamental Canadian public policy. While the existence of this principle is well-established, its scope is quite narrow and it is rarely applied. Hence, it is interesting that in both cases discussed in this case comment, the public policy defence was successfully invoked to defeat recognition of the foreign divorce.This case comment describes the circumstances which gave rise to the application of the public policy defence in these two cases, and then discusses whether its application was appropriate.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.993
Threshold uncertainty score0.958

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.077
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlberta Law ReviewSame topicConflict of Laws and JurisdictionFrench-language works237,207