Air Passengers Rights in the EU: International Uniformity versus Regional Harmonization
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article discusses a legal regime of air passengers’ rights in the European Union in light of exclusivity of the Montreal Convention of 1999. In particular, an analysis of Regulation No 216/2004 and associated case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) is discussed since it provides the only real illustration so far of how an international transport convention is applied and interpreted in the EU legal framework. The analysis of CJEU case law will be complemented by cases decided by the courts in common law jurisdictions, in particular, judgments emanating from the highest courts in the UK, US and Canada. The interplay between the international and EU legal orders has been a subject of rigorous academic debate since the early days of the European Communities and is of increasing relevance at present. In the context of this article, such interaction is critically examined from the standpoint that both regimes should co-exist in harmony and complement each other, and that the EU should contribute to international unification, rather than prevent Member States from effectively participating in the development of international conventions.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it