MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2795930076

Canada Update: Pursuing Just Desserts: The Supreme Court of Canada Clarifies Damage Awards from Charter Breaches

2011· article· en· W2795930076 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Soji John

Bibliographic record

VenueSMU Scholar (Southern Methodist University) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal Systems and Judicial Processes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCharterSupreme courtPolitical scienceLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Jean Chr6trien, he had no indication that his actions and those of the Vancouver Police Department on that day would influence how Canada now determines monetary damages for breach of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom ("Charter").'On July 23, 2010, the Supreme Court of Canada in Vancouver (City) v. Ward ruled that plaintiffs may obtain monetary awards in instances provincial courts had previously not recognized. 2In its decision, the "full Court agreed with most of the findings made in the lower Courts and concluded that if 'appropriate and just', an award of Charter damages may be warranted without proof of bad faith" and laid out a four-part test to determine when and guide how much damages are available for Charter Breaches. 3II.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.663
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.197 · 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.

Study designQualitative
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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSMU Scholar (Southern Methodist University)Same topicLegal Systems and Judicial ProcessesFrench-language works237,207