HAS THE CLOCK RUN OUT ON THE BULK SALES ACT: TAX TIME AND OTHER RECENT CASES
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Starting in Louisiana in 1894, bulk sales legislation spread like a pestilence through the United States so that within 20 years it had infected every state, From there, it also spread across the border into Canada so that, within a few more years, every province and territory had contracted it. However, bulk sales laws never spread south to Mexico or beyond the North American continent. After a lapse of almost 60 years, a push to eradicate bulk sales laws began in British Columbia in 1983. Following a groundbreaking report from the Law Reform Commission of British Columbia, British Columbia became, in 1985, the first jurisdiction in North America to repeal its legislation. Within a decade, law reform commissions in Manitoba (1988), Alberta (1990), Saskatchewan (1990), and the Northwest Territories (1990) had issued separate reports recommending repeal of their bulk sales statutes . Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, the Northwest Territories and the Yukon quickly did so. Almost a decade has passed so that, the country is almost divided evenly between those jurisdictions which are BSA-free and those which still have it. This article examines four recent cases that may collectively serve to reinvigorate the drive to eradicate bulk sales laws in those provinces that have so far been resistant to change. The cases culminated in a 2001 decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal in which the BSA was invoked to force a buyer to pay an unsecured creditor even though the proceeds of the bulk sales were not dissipated but were, in fact, applied in accordance with the evident priorities of the secured creditors.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".