MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2799508378 · doi:10.15688/lc.jvolsu.2017.4.20

The Constitution and the Supreme Court of Canada: from Appellate Tribunal to Final Court of Appeal

2017· article· en· W2799508378 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueLegal Concept · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicJudicial and Constitutional Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAppealTribunalLawSupreme courtConstitutionPolitical scienceRemand (court procedure)Original jurisdictionLaw of the caseCertiorariCourt of record

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: the article is devoted to the Constitution of Canada, whose 150th anniversary is celebrated in 2017, and the Supreme Court of Canada, also created in the XIX century. The article discusses the evolution of the role of the Supreme Court of Canada from the ordinary appellate court to the Final Court of Appeal. In this context, the features of the Canadian constitution as a written constitution in a common law federation are considered. The distinctiveness of regulating the authority of the branches of government in Canada are noted. Using comparative method, the author tries to explain the reasons for the apparent lack of official provision for judicial power in the text of the Canadian constitution, unlike the constitutions of the United States and Australia. The need for a final, independent judicial arbiter of disputes over federal-provincial jurisdiction is implicit in a federal system. Particular attention is paid to the creation of SCC and the reasons for the lack of constitutional protection of the institution. The appeal question to the Privy Council of Great Britain was key in the debates over the Supreme Court Act of 1875. Due to the preservation of appeals to the Privy Council, the Supreme Court most of its history existed in the shadow of the Judicial Committee. The JCPC had exercised ultimate judicial authority over all legal disputes in Canada, including those arising from Canada's Constitution. He played a central role in the constitutional structure of the country by, among other things, outlining the contours of the federal and provincial jurisdiction through a number of landmark cases. Finally, author comes to the following conclusions. The abolition of appeals to the Privy Council of United Kingdom led to the independence of the Canadian judiciary in 1949. It meant that the Supreme Court of Canada inherited the role of the Council in accordance with the Constitution of Canada. The final appellate function of the JCPC was an integral part of the Canadian judicial system, until it was finally removed by the Canadian Parliament in favor of the Supreme Court. Canadians could do without a general court of appeal for Canada as long as the Judicial Committee continued to play this role. With the abolition of appeals to the Privy Council, the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of Canada became essential.

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 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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.960
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.250 · 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