The Consumers Rights Protection in Consultancy Services: the Problems of Theory and Judicial Practice in Russian Federation
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 paper analyzes the existing legislative base, governing civil relations with consumers. The applied system-structural method of research helped to reveal the legal nature of the consultancy service and specifics of consumers’ rights’ protection on its provision and the existing problems in this sphere. The study found that by the general rule the means of civil rights and legal interest’s protection are pre-trial order (claim filing) and judicial (lawsuit) procedure for settlement of disputes. It was found also that the existing legal base does not guarantee quality and effectiveness of consumers’ rights protection in consultancy services. During the research, some civil legal problems in civilistic science have been revealed, along with the gaps in Act On protection of consumers’ rights, which sufficiently influence the level of citizens’ rights protection. The restoration of the financial situation of a customer of a consultancy service is also the way of protection and the consequence of civil liability. The performer could avoid such measures resorting to voluntary pre-trial settlement of the dispute.
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 | 0.004 | 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