MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W285780054

Presentment and Payment in Cheque Electronic Clearing: Advance Bank v. TD Bank

2005· article· en· W285780054 on OpenAlexaffabout
Benjamin Geva

Bibliographic record

VenueeYLS (Yale Law School) · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicConflict of Laws and Jurisdiction
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChequeClearingPaymentBusinessBank accountPayment processorFinancial systemIssuing bankEconomicsFinanceComputer scienceComputer security
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the context of Advance Banlc v. TD Bank, a case involving the return of across border dishonoured cheque by a Canadian drawee bank, the article addresses issues relating to the presentment and payment of cheques in Canada. It deals with compliance with the statutory requirements for presentment in the context of CPA clearing rules, and further discusses the legal implications of the treatment of a cheque processed in the clearing. The article argues that a delayed return of a cheque by the drawee bank constitutes "payment" of the cheque that benefits the depositor vis-a-vis the collecting bank, though not the drawee bank.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.812
Threshold uncertainty score0.378

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0210.013
Scholarly communication0.0130.004
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0150.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations1
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeYLS (Yale Law School)Same topicConflict of Laws and JurisdictionFrench-language works237,207