MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2985607091 · doi:10.20318/cdt.2019.5015

Competencia judicial internacional en acciones de consumidores contra compañías aéreas. Comentario a los autos del Juzgado de lo Mercantil de Madrid de 25/9/2018, 4/10/2018, 9/10/2018, 18/10/2018 y a la sentencia de la Audiencia Provincial de Girona de 27/9/2018 = International judicial competence in consumer actions against air companies. Commentary to the authors of the Court of Commercial of Madrid of 25/9/2018, 4/10/2018, 9/10/2018, 18/10/2018 and the judgment of the Provincial Hearing of Girona on 27/9/2018

2019· article· es· W2985607091 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

VenueCUADERNOS DE DERECHO TRANSNACIONAL · 2019
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Law and Aviation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAir transportPolitical scienceHumanitiesDerechoGeographyPhilosophyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Resumen: La regulación respecto los derechos de los pasajeros en el transporte aéreo tiene por objeto que aquellos consumidores se vean completamente resarcidos por los perjuicios que pudieran sufrir en el desarrollo de su vuelo, y que el pasajero pueda hacer valer sus derechos frente al transportista u operador aéreo en caso de cancelación, denegación de embarque o retraso significativo del vuelo. Este derecho de compensación plantea cuestiones relevantes de competencia judicial internacional, a la hora de determinar los tribunales ante los que el pasajero debe acudir para ejercitar de forma efectiva su derecho. En un sector como el de transporte aéreo de pasajeros es habitual la inclusión de cláusulas de elección de tribunales dentro de las condiciones y términos del transporte impuestas por el operador y cuya eficacia habrá de evaluarse a la luz del Derecho internacional privado.Palabras clave: transporte aéreo internacional, pasajeros, Convenio de Montreal, competencia judicial internacional, Derecho aplicable.Abstract: The regulation regarding passenger passenger rights in air transport aims to ensure that consumers are fully compensated for the damages they may suffer in the development of their flight, and that the passenger can assert their rights against the carrier or operator air in case of cancellation, denied boarding or significant flight delay. This right of compensation raises relevant issues of international judicial competence when determining the courts before which the passenger must go to effectively exercise their right. In a sector such as passenger air transport, it is usual to include clauses for the selection of courts within the conditions and terms of transport imposed by the operator and whose effectiveness will have to be evaluated in the light of private international private law.Keywords: international air transport, passengers, Montreal Convention, international jurisdiction, applicable law.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.294
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.008
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0050.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.265 · 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