Canada Update: Pursuing Just Desserts: The Supreme Court of Canada Clarifies Damage Awards from Charter Breaches
Bibliographic record
Abstract
WHEN Alan Ward attended a speech by then-Prime Minister 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.2 In 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.3 II. BACKGROUNDWhile British laws have provided some judicial guidance in conferring
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.013 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.003 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".