MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3107289713 · doi:10.4324/9781003122616-4

The Reason for Restitution

2020· book-chapter· en· W3107289713 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ewan McKendrick

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal principles and applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRestitutionPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter seeks to identify the different possible bases for a restitutionary claim where money has been paid pursuant to a transaction which it is later discovered was ultra vires one of the parties. One feature of the swaps litigation is that a number of different grounds of restitution were in play at various stages in the litigation. Five possible bases can be identified in the swaps cases: mistake of law, (total) failure of consideration, absence of consideration, the void nature of the contract and incapacity. The mistake of law bar was abrogated in Scotland by the momentous decision of an Inner House bench of five judges of the Court of Session in Morgan Guaranty Trust Company of New York v Lothian Regional Council. The decision in Morgan Guaranty must be seen in the context of the fall of the mistake of law bar in a number of jurisdictions: it had already fallen in Canada, Australia, and South Africa.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.018
Scholarly communication0.0090.009
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0080.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.005

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.335
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

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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations13
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLegal principles and applicationsFrench-language works237,207