MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2773248602 · doi:10.29173/alr1253

When Insolvency and Restructuring Law Supercedes Contract

2017· article· en· W2773248602 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Don Greenfield, Pat Maguire, David Spencer, Ken Lenz

Bibliographic record

VenueAlberta Law Review · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicRegulation and Compliance Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInsolvencyRestructuringStatuteBankruptcyCounterpartyBusinessLegislationCreditorLawLaw and economicsEconomicsFinanceDebtCredit riskPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The impact of counterparty insolvency on contracts has become an area of concern for those in the energy industry. The Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act, Alberta Business Corporations Act, and Canada Business Corporations Act; are all statutes that override or diminish strict contractual rights. This article examines six ways in which these pieces of legislation accomplish this: (1) restructuring proceedings; (2) stays of proceedings; (3) replacement and default clauses; (4) disclaimers of contracts; (5) assignment of contracts without the consent of the solvent counterparty; and (6) plans of arrangement. Public policy considerations support this legal framework, but it has a significant impact on the solvent party when trying to achieve restructuring or insolvency objectives and preserving legitimate bargains. Therefore, it is crucial for energy law practitioners to understand these policy considerations and this area of law to be able to properly advise clients of the inherent risks and options available.

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)0.000
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.968
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlberta Law ReviewSame topicRegulation and Compliance StudiesFrench-language works237,207