Los límites de responsabilidad en el transporte aéreo internacional de mercancías
Bibliographic record
Abstract
espanolAunque el sistema de responsabilidad cuasi-objetiva que establece el Convenio de Montreal para la carga esta en vigor en Espana desde 1999, el hecho de que los limites indemnizatorios solo puedan franquearse en contadisimas excepciones, y que una de ellas no sea el dolo o la culpa grave del transportista, ha llevado a algunos Tribunales a aceptar ciertas argumentaciones que tratan de aplicarlo. Se repasan algunas de esas situaciones, asi como los supuestos en los que de forma legitima los limites pueden superarse porque asi lo reconoce el Convenio y se reflexiona sobre el estado de la cuestion y su conexion con la practica de los seguros EnglishThe strict liability system for goods in the Montreal Convention is in force in Spain from 1999. However, like liability limits only can be overcome in very few situations, and dolo and willful misconduct are not included in that, some Judgements accept groundings that try to apply these exceptions. This article explains some of these situations and the real reasons that allow the carrier to overcome the limits, according to the Convention. Besides the conclusions the author reflex about the state-of-the-art and the connection of the application of these rules with the insurance market.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.001 |
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.
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".